Just after the New Year, the company I work for, Zango, was yanked unwittingly into the widgetsphere. We didn't create, launch or distribute a widget, but someone else did, and ran it on Facebook. Normally this would go largely unnoticed by the industry; it happens thousands of times every month. But this particular Facebook application led to an ad promoting the Zango toolbar, which people can download onto their computers in order to access our catalog of online content, including games, videos, emoticons, tools and utilities. A small research company specializing in online security pointed an accusing (but misdirected) finger at Zango, and we were dragged into the fracas by way of a couple dozen trade publications and blogs.
We didn't have anything to do with that particular widget, although like many other publishers, we have started along the widget marketing learning curve, rolling one out to create interest in our other content and offerings. From our perspective as a desktop advertising company, and also one with direct widget experience, we are now in a unique position to advise the burgeoning widget marketing sub-industry, as this incident has shed some light on the striking similarities between widget marketing and advertising software (adware).
What was most notable about this incident from my perspective was the response from all corners of interactive marketing -- one of sheer outrage. People in our business have necessarily thick skins. But even we were a little unprepared for a reaction this volatile. It was cold water on hot wok oil. The juxtaposition of widget marketing and adware underscored the vast gap between marketers' perspectives of the two, and allowed a glimpse into how swiftly and vigilantly the industry comes to the defense of widgets.
Many of today's industry executives and pioneers might not remember marketers' warm response to the launch of "Desktop Applications" and how they were lauded industry-wide for the irresistible targeting opportunities they afforded. Times changed, and adware no longer enjoys "Most Favored Nation status" within the industry, despite continuing to have a strong following from advertisers. Widgets, on the other hand, are enjoying their time in the limelight, despite having no established significant revenue streams.
Adware and widgets couldn't seem more different, yet upon deeper inspection, they are remarkably similar, just in different stages of their development:
- Both require users to take action in order to initiate and scale the model. Adware users download a toolbar or desktop application; widgets rely on a website or profile or blog owner to upload a small application to their page.
- The principal function of both adware and widgets is to provide an added level of interactivity on top of the web experience.
- And each is designed to do this in a way that adds value to both users and advertisers.
But more important than the similarity in business models is the trajectory of perception both adware and widget marketing are on. The former remains maligned largely for past transgressions, including a lack of transparency, unwanted invasiveness and privacy breaches (both malicious and unintended).
Yet the major stories about widget marketing currently threaten to poke holes in its armor as well:
- Hyper-valuation in the absence of established or scalable revenues
- Rampant proliferation to the point of intrusive distraction, spawning issues including bacn (the term given to email subscribed, but not read), clutter, and a page weight that can compromise the web experience
- Trademark infringement
Adware fell from grace. Spam led email to its crisis. Widget marketing is clearly on the same path to a crossroads, where it can learn from the emerging marketing technologies that went before it, or make the same myopic mistakes.
Who better than an embattled desktop advertising company to offer advice to widget marketers at this stage in their sub-industry's development? Widget marketers can either look down the road we have already traveled, or race blindly, oblivious to the curves ahead. If permitted to navigate, I would humbly offer these directions:
- Look further. Set your sights beyond your next round of funding or liquidity event, and think about competitive responses to your actions. When not enough rounds of "What if?" are played at product and feature launches, unexpected success disasters occur. For example, each individual viral feature is nifty and effective, but collectively create such a distracting din as to threaten rendering all of them obsolete.
- Balance needs of users with needs of advertisers. The race for 'eyeballs' promotes viral growth, but at the expense of revenue opportunity. We don't need another unbranded time-waster to prove that widgets can be popular. We get it. Now create something both personally and fiscally relevant.
- Err on the side of naked. If adware has a single lesson for the rest of marketing, it's to be completely transparent. Viral marketing and unintended consequences do not just create a crisis; they initiate an epidemic, capable of hobbling an entire sub-industry.
- Anticipate the worst-case scenario, and manage against it. Someone is developing or will develop a widget that tracks behavior and allows dynamic serving of ads based on this behavior. It may very well be benign, but if the industry finds out about it in hindsight, it will cause a crisis for all widget marketers and cast everyone's integrity into question. Anticipate that, and take steps to educate ahead of the fact, rather than relying on damage control after it's too late.
Widgets are unquestionably unique and afford exiting new opportunities for advertisers. But no macro-event in business is unprecedented, and widget marketing is uncommonly similar to other marketing applications that have come before. Avoiding near-future missteps by studying the recent past is widget marketing's greatest opportunity for smooth and steady growth.
York Baur is executive vice president of business development at Zango.
