iPhone Buzz breaks 11,000 for iDay; let the consumer revolution begin

[Click on the above image for a larger version]

The number of stories over the last 24 hours about the iPhone has boomed to 11,690, but what stories they are. Today's New York Times has three iPhone articles and boasts an iPhone editorial titled "Eat the iPhone" (note: subscription may be required to read editorials). The Wall Street Journal (subscription required) has no fewer than four different articles referencing the iPhone launch, including an excellent one by Paul Kedrosky titled, "The Jesus Phone" in which he notes Apple's amazing lack of traditional publicity relations:

So, how has Apple done it? Some people argue it has cleverly drip-dripped product information to the market, tantalizing consumers and journalists alike, everyone hanging on to learn about the next nifty feature. A big, bright touch screen! A real Web browser! A finger-flickable interface! I gotta get one!

But this theory is wrong. Apple hasn't steadily dripped product information. As a matter of fact, the iPhone that Steve Jobs described and demonstrated back in January, when he first announced the product, is pretty much the same as what is being launched today. I am hard-pressed to think of a single material feature in the product that wasn't announced six months ago, right down to the nifty new way you can scroll through songs.

So if Apple hasn't teased and tantalized its way to iPhone ubiquity, another theory goes, surely it has been the company's massive, multibillion-dollar marketing campaign that has done the deed. The trouble is, there is no such multibillion-dollar Apple campaign. Apple simply announced the product, and then did nothing. It has only been in the last month that there have been some television advertisements, and those were merely product demonstrations set to music. Granted, it was nice music, but it was also just an iPhone being put through its paces, hardly the recipe for hype.

We noted nearly a year go that Apple's quest for excellent consumer experiences and secrecy are two ingredients of the secret sauce for its remarkable public awareness. But is it really worth all that effort?

Here's a quick way to put a dollar value on Apple's remarkable non-marketing. We've been tracking the number of articles on the iPhone for the last 11 days. During that period, more than 86,740 news articles have appeared referencing the iPhone, none of which Apple paid for. If we were to substitute paid advertisements at $2,500 each for those news articles, it would have cost Apple $217 million to buy that amount of publicity. Yet, because Apple focused on what customers wanted and addressed a true consumer need for a simple and powerful cell phone, it never spent a penny of that money. Said another way, Apple garnered $217 million in ad savings -- which falls to its bottom line as pure profit -- over 11 days by being a smart marketer. And that number is probably more like a billion dollars in advertising savings over the past six months.

Kedrosky makes the same point about Apple giving consumers what they wanted in a different but equally powerful way to close his article:

If it's not the marketing campaign, nor the cult of Apple, nor the showmanship of the charismatic Steve Jobs, then how has the iPhone succeeded in getting millions of people interested in buying something so expensive that hasn't even been launched?

I'll tell you. First, people hate their cell phones. Other than making phone calls -- a downright dreary bit of business -- using phones for Internet, entertainment and pretty much anything else has been abysmal. Cell phones are best characterized as crippled, paternalistic devices best suited for people who think straitjackets are comfortable evening wear. They have horrible Web browsers, crummy screens, and obscure-to-the point-of-opacity interfaces. (After all, some of the iPhone's most hyped features, like maps, are on traditional cell phones as well. You just can't find the feature.)

But in addition to hating their phones, people hate their cell phone carriers. Hate, hate, hate, hate. The major cellular providers -- with their ham-handed "support" and fascist control of software that can run on phones directly -- are right up there with the IRS in terms of inspiring your average mobile phone user's disgust and loathing.

To such consumers, Apple's iPhone seems like a cool drink of water. These people want to be liberated either from bad phones or from bad phone companies. They want to choose a device that does all the things they want to do -- calling, being entertained, consuming information -- not all the things their phone company thinks they should do (and then be charged $5 a month per feature for the privilege). They want phones that make it possible to do calls over wi-fi, to the point that cellular companies could potentially become irrelevant.

The massive upwelling of grassroots support for the iPhone shows that a revolution has been building for some time. Now it's here. Cell phone carriers are going to have to respond by cutting the length of contracts and eliminating exclusivity, and most important, by finally being responsive to their market. If not, iPhones (or their successors) will finish them off.

iDay is here. Let the consumer revolution against the mobile phone business begin.