If you’ve used an iPhone, a GPS device or have seen the movie Minority Report there is probably very little in this video that will astound you. That said, it is still interesting to see all of the current technologies (touch screens, digital paper, see-through screens, large video walls, video screens and surfaces everywhere) being used together to create a vision for what Microsoft thinks communications technology could look like ten years out.
The video quality is excellent and you have to give Microsoft credit for making a bet (albeit a safe one) on what the future might look like. Very few companies would have the courage to do this for fear being ridiculed or guessing ‘wrong’.
I’m not sure if Gene Roddenberry predicted the future importance of the mobile phone in the 60′s or helped shaped the design of mobile equipment when he introduced the flip top ‘communicators’ in the early Star Trek series but it’s interesting to see how predictions can sometimes influence the shape of the future that they forecast.
I’d love to see Apple’s vison of the future – we’ll never get to see that though, they are probably too busy inventing it.
Any video that ends with the dialogue “Man, that thing is huge”…
“That’s what she said,” probably needs a good edit.
Lenovo – the Chinese electronics giant that bought IBM’s PC division a few years ago recently introduced the ThinkPadW700ds, the world’s first dual screen laptop. Starting at around $3000, it’s not cheap. The marketing folks at Lenovo decided that a video targeted to the lowest common denominator would be a great way to promote this premium product. I’m sure they developed some really good rationalizations in the process:
“Come on… Sex Sells’
‘It’s a spoof, a parody, a mockumentary – don’t take it too seriously”
“Hey, it’s funny… ish”
“It’s retro – don’t you get it?”
“It’s viral”
“It’s suppose to look cheap”
“Sure it’s tasteless – but it will generate some wicked buzz!!!”
“You just don’t understand, this is what works in marketing 2.0 today”
“It’ll really appeal to young males aged 20 -35 with no social skills”
Of course much in marketing is subjective and what is ‘appropriate’ is open to a wide range of opinions. Appropriate or not, videos like these raise some interesting questions:
Would the owners of billion dollar brands (Apple, Nike, Coke, GE) produce a promotional video like this? … and does that even matter?
Is it ever appropriate to use things that may be questioned by some as being in bad taste?
Is it ever right to risk your brand image on something questionable?
When you perform focus testing and five people out of ten say “I wouldn’t use that,” do you listen to them and give it a pass or do you listen to the other five and soldier on?
Pfizer Canada along with the Starlight Childrens Foundation introduced a viral video campaign to raise awareness (and money through donations) of the challenges that seriously ill children face. The video was produced by Toronto’s Zig Studio who did a brilliant job at showing that love, support and courage can sometimes be the best medicine. Interestingly there is no dialogue in the video, just a powerful message with an emotional ending. This is not your standard viral video fare and will hopefully raise the bar for other companies looking to take advantage of social media.
Released in the fall it hasn’t received the attention or traction that it’s creators would have liked. It’s difficult to say whether it’s lack of notoriety is because of lack of proper video seeding and promotion or whether YouTube viewers are simply more attuned to dancing cats and kids playing with light sabres. Either way it’s a great piece of video that Pfizer and it’s creators should be proud of.
Microsoft’s newest video promotion makes the “I’m a PC” guy look cool.
Microsoft has introduced a new application called Songsmith. It may well be a great application but the “High School Musical” style video promotion for the new software has to make you wonder what they were thinking.
Perhaps they are smarter than everyone. Maybe they figured that if they made it just bad enough, if they appealed to virtually no one, and took campy to new levels of lame that the blogosphere would light up talking about this new promotional video. If that was the plan - mission accomplished.
Maybe this was the plan too when they spent a cazillion dollars on those confusing and spectacularly unfunny Bill Gates and Jerry Seinfeld promotions.
Microsoft’s official line is that it was a low budget marketing viral video created by two of the guys who coded the product (and who also starred in the video – good for them) . Of course ‘Low budget’ is a relative term. You have to know that they still spent more time and money on this ‘low budget’ diddy than most companies could afford.
The takeaway - calling it a viral video doesn’t excuse it and certainly doesn’t mean the affect on your brand will be negligable.
Other notes: 1. Interesting APPLE references: The little girl – who’s name is ‘LISA’ is using a Macbook Pro!
2. I think the most astute label I have read in reference to this video is “Craptastic.”
3. They should attempt a ‘Death Metal” version next.
Invisialign is a California based company that produces clear, removable teeth ‘aligners’. It’s two key points of differentiation with braces are that Invisalign’s product are easy to use and they are nearly invisible. The promotional video above highlights these two advantages in a very simple and very engaging manner. (Sure, having a presenter who looks and sounds like Demi Moore can’t hurt…).
This ad is very effective. It clearly and simply demonstrates the benefits of the product, it does so in a very engaging manner and it also tells a story which makes the presentation more real.
The production could not have been simpler – a close up of the presenter and a simple and direct call-to-action. There are a hundreds of different ways this promotion could have been created – many of them ‘award-winning’. Often simple and direct is the most effective route.
… and here is a Eurpoean promotion for Invisalign which likely cost a lot more to produce. Which one do you think is more effective?
“Any problem in the world can be solved by dancing” is a great corporate holiday video created by the folks at First Round Capital. Sure it’s low budget, roughly edited and obviously ‘inspired’ by the YouTube viral classic ‘Where the hell is Matt‘ (over 14 million views) but what the heck – it’s engaging, it’s real and they obviously had a lot fun making it.
Are high production values necessary for corporate video? No, not necessarily.
The spare and primitive style used in the above promotional video for Ford’s new Sync Technology might make you wonder whether Ford just decided to save some money and go with the animated storyboard presented by their agency. The video was created by Commoncraft, a small Seattle-based company that produces instructional and informational web videos using very simple techniques - cut-out images, simple diagrams and a straight-forward delivery.
The video works on many levels. It serves it’s purpose – it describes the value proposition and benefits of Fords new service very well, it is easy to understand, it is very easy to watch and I imagine it appeals to a relatively younger market who care about the ability to sync multiple devices in a convenient way.
Corprate videos don’t have to be slick (overproduced). Not everyone likes slick (big budget, mini-movies). Gen Y and the Millennials have grown up with not-so-slick (YouTube). And while Gen X’ers and Boomers are more accustom to traditional media - MTV and television, online viewing habits are changing quickly. The influence of user-generated content (yes, most of it quite awful) will have a significant affect on the style and production values of corporate video in the future. We will see many new non-standard approaches to corporate video as the cost of production continues to drop and the accessibility and exposure to different production styles continues to increase.
All style issues aside (sure, many other styles could have communicated the same key marketing messages for Ford just as effectively), the important thing is that the video did it’s job – it communicated the intended message very well and I imagine it was done at a cost that pleased the struggling automaker.
