Junk, spam or useful - An email critique

Email, personalisation, user generated content and influence

So during our digital marketing seminar we were asked to look at a specific email sent to you to analyse. This could be anything such as junk emails, promotional emails etc. looking into how the email is personalised to you, would you open it and why it was appealing (or not appealing) to open.

So I chose to look at an email from Flatspot, a clothing website which i have bought products from previously and have an account with. These emails come up in my 'Promotions' tab as I use Gmail. Usually I just delete emails straight away from my promotions tab, however, I often use this website and generally check new emails.

So firstly the email is not personalised to me, it doesn't contain my name or any personal information. For me I quite like this, it's not personal just showing me offers and products that I like, although they do have my name as it is in the email script.

The title of the email is simply latest products added this week. Going into the email the website name is at the top of the page as a link you can follow to the main page of the site. there are also around 10 images of different items of clothing/accessories once you click on one of these images it takes you to a page within the website focused on that particular brand. I think this is pretty good as it allows you to see a small selection of items similar to the one in the photo but doesn't take you just to that one particular item. 

I like the way this email is set out because it's very simple and the links take you to useful parts of the site. Also there is not much writing to read through or too much information to look through. I like the simplicity of this as I don't want to spend time reading through emails. It was short and to the point.

I am personally not a fan of personalisation in emails as it implies they have lots of information about you. what I like about this email is that it's a company I know and know I will be interested in the content. However, perhaps a link to my account on the website could be useful but not a necessity for me. Have a look see what you think...

Malte Spitz - Mobile Data

In 2012 Malte Spitz went onto TED Talks to tell the world about his views and findings on the storage of mobile data and its effects on mobile users.

In 2006 The EU brought into effect the Data Retention Act which caused a number of protests round Europe opposing the act. However, the act was passed and companies and state agencies have the option to store your mobile data for 6 months to 2 years. At first glance this doesn't seem to bad, theres nothing that important on my phone, but when you look at a whole area or nation the results are far more important.

Companies can track where you are at all times, where you travel, where you sleep. They can even see what train you get to work and how far you walk from the station to the office. Companies can also create an extremely large communication network. This shows who speaks to who and how information spreads.

Malte Spitz relates this issue to the falling of the Berlin wall. For example, if protesters at that time had mobile phones the German government could have found out who started the protests, where they would be protesting and may well have ultimately been able to prevent this. The Iron Curtain may still exist if this was the case. Tweeting messages starting protests in Gezi Park could have been removed or tracked allowing state agencies to intervene.

This is where Sptiz highlights Stasi 2.0. Stasi was the secret police in Germany from 1950-1990 which was in charge of preemptive security strategy and has been called one of the most effective and repressive intelligence and secret police agencies to ever have existed. Stasi 2.0 was the nickname give to the Data Retention Act in Germany. This truly shows the possibility of repression and control through mobile data.

Although it's obvious to pick out the bad implications of the act there also seems to be quite a few silver linings. Yes it is a bit of a privacy issue and a possible method of control but consider the marketing possibilities. For example, companies that have information on you won't send you mass marketing messages for products or services you don't care about. Instead they use direct marketing to show you products and services that interest you, things you've been talking about or searching for. 

This is already the case on computers showing you products you may have searched for, but marketing directly to your mobile could save you time and money. This could be utilised by real time marketing to your mobile. Consumers aren't always at their computers, sometimes real time marketing to mobiles can inform users while on the move. This has almost endless possibilities from showing sales in certain areas or simply supplying you with information vital to your journey home. 

http://www.ted.com/talks/malte_spitz_your_phone_company_is_watching.html