The announcement of the new iPad Mini was obviously exciting for digital geeks. Some were underwhelmed that no new shiny features were included, but it is the nature of the device that changes the mobile marketing game. Especially in regards to content creation and curation.

While the actual features are the same as the traditional iPad, the fact that the device is smaller, and in turn, more mobile, means that the tablet experience is different. The Ad Age article outlines how tablets have always centered around a "laid-back" experience. That led to tablet-specific marketing messages surrounding magazine-style, full screen take overs. More feature-like content is expected because the user is in the mindset of settling in to consume content. However, on a phone or much more mobile device, the user's mindset is much different. It's about questions being answered as they occur. About being contextually relevant to what's going on. Whether that's the time of day, user's interests, seasonal, location-based, etc.

What makes this even trickier is, Apple designed the iPad Mini to automatically render all apps and tablet-optimized websites to appear the same as on the traditional iPad. While on the surface that seems great, less work.... wrong. The layout, design, content, subject matter all may very well be different for the two different experiences: the laid-back, feet up tablet experience or the on-the-go mobile state of mind. While it's great to add another layer into the mobile mix, it's just another step that marketers have to think through. But on the flip side, that step is one more way to connect with consumers and build brands.

Why Advertisers and Publishers Should Care That Apple's 'iPad Mini' Is More Mobile

It feels like almost every brand Facebook page I stumble onto, there's a tab or link to a contest or giveaway. It makes sense, and is a great way to connect with consumers and give them actual incentive to get involved. But a blog post for Ad Age's digitalnext blog looks at J.P. Morgan Chase's near disastrous consequences after a philanthropic digital effort went wrong.

The concept was for fans to vote on which charities Chase would donate money to. But after claims of voter fraud and supposed Chase interference to ensure charity winners aligned with the brand's missions stirred plenty of controversy. The column is essentially a critique of the program and points out where Chase should have been more transparent with its fans.

This is a perfect example of how our digital world is changing the game. With the ability to publish and gather feedback instantly thanks to digital and, in particular, mobile, brands are expected to prove validity and provide answers regularly and as issues come up. With the shift towards brands as publishers, there are new arenas that businesses need to understand the rules of if they want to play there. But at the end of the day, the basic principles are the same. A financial company like J.P. Morgan Chase should be extremely familiar with consumers expecting answers and validity. What they're not used to is that demand being instant and playing out on their owned media.

Source: Chase Shows How Not to Manage an Online Charity Campaign