Tom Idle
20th November 2018 - 5 mins read
T

his was Baptista’s revenge protest against a betting industry he claims regularly exploits people like him—those that have lost thousands of pounds betting on FOBTs and are encouraged to keep doing so, regardless of the consequences.

His actions, while destructive and illegal, garnered a wealth of sympathy across the media, raising serious ethical questions about the validity of FOBTs in high street betting shops. A lunchtime flutter on the horses has become legend across the generations. But offering the option of pouring hundreds of pounds into an algorithm- controlled giant computer is a relatively new phenomenon—and one that has raised concerns, particularly among local councillors and MPs. They continually face questions as to the social benefits (or otherwise) of betting shops popping up on every high street across the UK, especially when two million people are said to be addicted to gambling or at risk of developing a problem.

Of course, it is a narrative of which the gambling industry is only too aware. Being a socially (and environmentally) responsible business that plays a useful role for people and the communities in which they live, is front of mind for many CEOs—even those running companies in a sector constantly battling claims it is devoid of any positive social value whatsoever.

For those of you still unsure about whether it's worth ‘doing sustainability’ (largely defined as investing in measures to ensure your organisation is fit, proper and able to stay competitive for the long-term), you can stop it right now. More and more evidence suggests that those companies proactively looking for ways to make sure they are viable and attractive entities 50 years from now are already reaping the benefits. Just look at the consumer goods giant Unilever.

When addressing shareholder meetings, the softly spoken boss Paul Polman sounds more like Bono than a CEO, opting for soliloquies on global warming rather than detailed analysis of quarterly financial returns.

For the past six years the business has been building what it calls ‘Sustainable Living’ (SL) brands, such as Lifebuoy, Ben & Jerry’s, Dove and Hellmann’s—businesses with a social or environmental purpose strongly attached to their operations or customers. For example, the ice cream maker Ben & Jerry’s exists to “make and sell the finest quality ice cream” all the while sourcing natural ingredients and making sure its operations have zero negative impact on the planet.

All of the company’s brands are said to be focused on reducing their environmental footprint and boosting their positive social impact. Those that are furthest ahead are tagged as ‘SL brands’ and, collectively, they grew over 50 per cent faster than the rest of the business last year, delivering more than 60 per cent of Unilever’s growth. “Our results show that sustainability is good for business,” says Polman, pointing to a spurring of innovation, strengthened supply chains and reduced costs.

The telecoms business BT is another good example. It has spent plenty of energy and resources in recent years making sure its product and service offering can help its business customers be more responsible and efficient too. As part of its 3:1 goal, BT's consumer operations and products that contribute to carbon savings now represent 22 per cent of annual revenues and are worth more than £5 billion.

Waking up to the realisation that customers, of all shapes and sizes, care about what it is their favourite brands are doing to create a better world, or not, companies should know that CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility—or whatever you want to call it) is increasingly valuable.

And that’s largely because the next generation of consumers and customers want to know why companies exist, how they operate and whether their core business is having a negative impact on people and planet. A new study by Cone Communications reveals that 87 per cent of consumers say they would purchase a product because a company advocated for an issue they cared about, while more than 75 per cent say they would boycott a product or company if the brand supported an issue contrary to their ethics and values.

It is a trend only likely to grow with Millennials and the Gen Z putting their money where their mouths are, purposefully backing more socially responsible brands over any others. Even if they don’t care about issues like climate change, pressured by peers on social media, they know they ought to so are more easily swayed to ‘do the right thing’.

So, if CSR has real value, why aren’t more companies talking about the good, positive things they are doing?

A lack of confidence and an absence of good, simple storytelling lies at the heart of the lacklustre response by all but a handful of progressive businesses. Ultimately, customers want their relationships with brands to possess the very same qualities they value in their personal relationships: Trust, empathy, respect, openness.

But in a corporate world defined by quarterly growth stats, companies blindly believe that acting more human will destroy any chance of economic success—a view that flies in the face of a growing mountain of evidence.

Maybe it’s too early for the likes of William Hill and Ladbrokes to gamble on ripping out their valuable FOBTs, a move that would stake a claim to the moral high ground.

But what might the future CSR payback look like among a consumer base keen to defend and support companies that take an ethical stand? Might we see gamblers flock in unison to any betting shop willing to gamble on first mover advantage in positively responding to Baptista’s argument that they in fact may be destroying the lives of society’s most vulnerable.

In a world of continued divestment from companies unwilling to accept and respond to environmental and social risks, the corporate world can no longer bury its head in the sand.

Instead, it must rise in response to the big challenges the world faces—from poverty and human rights abuse, to global warming and water scarcity. To avoid being left behind forever, companies must change their course. But in doing so they must engage their customers effectively—a task that demands transparency, accountability, honesty and, above all else, fantastic communication and storytelling to bring them along for the ride.



At 
Thirty Seven, we offer content and design services to ensure your campaigns reach the right audiences at the right times. Our journalist led approach ensures your content is interesting, engaging and informative so you gain brand awareness and engagement whether it is social media content or a whitepaper. 

 

Marketing

Will GDPR prove a catalyst for improving content quality?

Adam Fisher 29th January 2018 — 3 mins read
O

f course, the regulations, which are supposed to improve data protection for EU citizens, residents and businesses, do have significant implications for brands and the way they communicate with their customers.

But is there another side to the doom, gloom and scaremongering?

Well, at Thirty Seven we believe the changes, which come into force on May 25, present an opportunity for marketers and could be a catalyst for good.

Before the rise of the internet it was very hard for brands to produce content, at least cost effectively.

But as the World Wide Web has gone from strength to strength it has become ever easier for organisations to reach customers.

However, this has come at a cost, because while content marketing has been enjoying a boom, there is little doubt it has been at the expense of quality. There’s now less craft and more churn in the majority of content and all too often what customers receive offers little in the way of value.

Of course what exactly constitutes ‘quality’ content is subjective, vague and elusive. However, Google uses a definition which I believe works as well as any.

Its evaluators use the EAT acronym when ranking website pages. It stands for Expertise, Authoritativeness and Trustworthiness and we believe it is a good model to adopt to ensure content stays ahead of the pack.

So how will GDPR impact the quality of content? Well, by giving people more control of their data they will also have more control of what information they receive.

Brands need to be able to show that consent to receive their information has been “freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous” – ideally this should be achieved through a double opt-in procedure involving a signup process, such as clicking a box, and a confirmation of that instruction by clicking a link in a follow-up email.

Businesses will also have to make it easy for that consent to be withdrawn at any time.

This means that, particularly in the days after the May deadline, many brands will have fewer people on their mailing lists. While there will still be those who argue that size matters, it is surely better to have a more concise list of people who look forward to receiving your content than a larger list of people who are indifferent and don’t really know how or why your emails end up in their inbox.

More importantly, it also means brands will have to work harder than ever to get people to subscribe and sign-up and continue to be happy to receive their content.

And that in turn means content needs to be better quality, targeted, personalised, niche and valuable. In short, content that turns recipients into fans.

Of course, it is possible that some email marketeers will try to duck these regulations or convince themselves that only the really big players will be targeted by GDPR enforcers in the early days, but the risks of non-compliance are eye-watering; a fine which is either four per cent of turnover or €20 million - whichever is the larger.

Another possibility is that organisations may simply reduce their email marketing activity as they struggle to comply with the GDPR May deadline and turn to social media more instead to fill the vacuum.

But to make that approach work they will still need to place greater emphasis on the quality of their social media output, because if customers are going to engage with that content they will again need to feel it has value and is worth sharing.

We are not suggesting that GDPR is going to improve the quality of the internet, but it will give the content you receive in your mailbox a much needed shot in the arm.

 

At Thirty Seven, we offer content and design services to ensure your campaigns reach the right audiences at the right times. Our journalist led approach ensures your content is interesting, engaging and informative so you gain brand awareness and engagement whether it is social media content or a whitepaper.

Tom Idle
29th March 2018 - 8 mins read

Every company wants to be an authority in their sector - those that engage the media usually are

Media First designs and delivers bespoke media and communications courses that use current working journalists, along with PR and communications professionals, to help you get the most from your communications plan.