1. A position, such as “celebrity”, “pastor”, or “President”; and/or
2. A tool, such as a blog, website, magazine, or TV show; and/or
3. An audience, such as the readers of a magazine or viewers of a TV show.

In marketing thought, the word usually encompasses all three of the above but with an emphasis on #3.  Who is reached? How many are reached? How easily are they influenced by the platform to buy or otherwise consume and/or act on the message?

Traditional Marketing.

In the view of traditional marketing, platforms are seen as more or less static and each has a certain known value in terms of sales.  A certain long-standing successful magazine, for instance, is seen as a platform whose audience has certain responsive characteristics that you, as an advertiser, can depend on for sales.  When you decide to use (rent) their platform you can expect certain results.

In this sense, a transaction is taking place.  You are paying dollars to “rent” their platform (advertise) and expecting a return on your investment that will make the “rental” worthwhile.  Christian bookstores are a platform where record labels “rent” space by allowing the store to keep part of the proceeds from sales.  This is seen as a valuable transaction if the store has a “good” audience.  These are two different kinds of “platform rentals.” In the case of the magazine, it makes money regardless of the advertising success. In the case of the bookstore, it makes nothing if the recording does not sell.  This type of platform rental transaction is seen as a more “vulnerable” transaction and the store covers itself by retaining the right to return product to the label for credit. The label, in either case, has no cover.

Platform renting in this traditional sense is the business of entities in this model. If you want to “use” their platform again, you have to rent it again.

Another feature of traditional marketing is the “chaining” of platforms.  A music artist may transact with a record label to rent their perceived platform which includes the label’s ability to rent a radio platform, a product distribution platform, and various other promotional platforms.

This chaining of platforms in the music world has placed a whole series of platform rental transactions between the artist and the followers of the artist. The artist now depends on the whole chain to “grow” or achieve success. And all the connected platforms in this rental chain depend more or less on the success of the others.

And, as we all know, any chain is only as strong as the weakest link.  And, as we all know, most of the traditional platforms in the music world now are weak links.  Why these traditionally good platforms have now become weak links between the artist and fans are the subject of way too much discussion to get into here. The point is that some new way of understanding platforms is needed and there is a lot of experimenting and some success stories.

Enter “New” Marketing.

New marketing is a set of very fluid and sometimes contradictory ideas for getting around the fact that the platform rental model is breaking.  It attempts to understand and create ways to use new platforms that do not involve rentals and, usually, advocates primarily creating your own platform for interacting with constituents. New marketing usually denies that platforms are stable and reliable unless they are understood as platforms of conversation with a talking/listening mode — as opposed to the old model where platforms could just direct its constituents to act in a certain way.

In its most radical form, new marketing would advocate that the follower (fan, constituent, member, etc.) in fact IS the platform.  Such an approach attempts to create connections with the platform/follower that are so valuable that the follower will spread the message.  This is exactly the meaning of “viral” marketing and is what has made YouTube the success that it is.

Less radical forms go for the (non-monetized) sharing of platforms.  A blogger may interview a celebrity artist (who already has a platform) to expand his own platform (traffic) while the artist looks to build his own following (platform) by reaching the blogger’s readership who may not know that artist or who may see the artist in a more favorable light as a result of the interview.

In either case, the very meaning and basis of the idea of “platform” is changing from one that sees stable and reliable entities telling their audience what to do or buy (and charging advertisers for so doing), to one where the audience determines the rules of the game and the way to build that audience is to listen and converse with meaningful dialog.  Such conversation creates a valued experience that influences both parties.  In the music world, fans grow more attached to the artist and the artist learns what the fans want them to create.

This idea is, of course, not so new. Successful sellers of things created have always needed to understand their audience. New marketing simply focuses on that and brings new creative platforms to the task.  If there is one aspect that stands out in this process it would be attitude. Valuing the audience is an attitude—one that is mostly lacking in the platforms that no longer work. The folks in “our audience” these days have little time for being told what to like or buy.  They gravitate toward valued experiences and may, sometimes, purchase souvenirs of that experience.

____________________

If you have an interest in this and other new marketing ideas for artists, check out the Seminar link on the right sidebar. A new class begins this month.

To their credit, they seem more interested is serving their followers than worrying about whether someone gets to hear or see their music for “free.”  Someone has figured out that, in this “music 2.0″ world, they are not just “selling music.” Perry Fans want the music, yes. But they also want more: they want the whole package of who the Perrys’ are: their beliefs, their lifestye, their daily inspiration, and most of all they want the Perrys’ attention.

And The Perrys are giving them that; they are giving themselves. Genuinely. And using the internet to do it. And their “friends” are bringing other, new, friends to the fold.

There was a discussion recently on Averyfineline about whether the Perry’s are “the best” in Southern Gospel. This kind of discussion is mostly irrelevant today.  The Perrys are already “the best” to their followers. They are “famous” to their followers, whether the standard media notices or not.  And these followers are bringing others.

“Old school” connections with fans using “new marketing” tools. Music 2.0.  The Perrys are getting it right!