Archive for the 'The Effect of Video on Your Brand' CategoryPage 2 of 3

Talyor Guitars benefits from United Airline’s mess

 

 

A week ago I posted about Dave Carroll and his band ‘Sons of Maxwell’ getting the run around from United Airlines after the negligent mishanding of his Taylor guitar. Fed up and frustrated with United’s lack of interest  Dave decided to punish the Airline the best way he knew how – he wrote a song about the experience. (Two more songs are in the works…)

At the time of posting the video had an impressive 200,000 hits on YouTube. That was then. A week later the video has been viewed more than 3,000,000 times and the blogosphere is alight with the story. Must be tough sledding in the United PR department.

Sensing an opportunity Taylor Guitars has jumped into the video fray and published (responded with) their own ’show of support’ video. It’s difficult to estimate but you have to guess the PR value for ‘Sons of Maxwell’ is in the hundreds of thousands of dollars and Taylor guitar has probably never been this famous. Like all things viral this will quickly blow over but the entire incident will have left an invigorated Canadian country band, a rejuvenated guitar manufacturer and a discombobulated airline in its wake.

Share This
  • email
  • Print
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • LinkedIn
  • Google Bookmarks
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr

Evian’s brilliant roller babies… but it’s still just water, right?

It’s just water, isn’t it?

For some reason the French are really good at branding. Who else can get you to spend hundreds of dollars on a scarf or a little bottle of perfume? You would think that water – the ultimate commodity (the ‘air’ market hasn’t fully matured but I’m sure “l’air” will be at the high end…) – would be really, really difficult to brand. The French ‘own’ two of the best known water brands: Evian (owned by Danone – a French company) and Perrier (now owned by Nestle – a Swiss company). The ‘informed’ ask for branded water. The uber-keen insist on it. The well-healed bath in it. It’s still just water.

If you want to maintain position in a  highly competitive, commoditized market you have to remind people how important your brand is – which brings us to the roller rappin’ babies.

This video has ‘viral’ written all over it. It’s clever, it’s surprising… verging on astonishing and it’s fun to watch. Way to go Evian. What do babies have to do with the Evian brand – nothing. You can certainly make the arguement, as Evian does, that drinking their water keeps you young but I can imagine a hundred other brands (Pampers?) who would have benefited more from the visuals in this video.

Does all of that matter? Probably not. Evian benefits by associated itself with a really good viral video (and ad) and continues to keep its brand front and centre.

This video also demonstrates that there are now very few technical barriers stopping video developers from creating ‘virtually’ anything they can imagine. It is possible to make people believe that almost anything is ‘real’ – like drinking special water will keep you young.

Share This
  • email
  • Print
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • LinkedIn
  • Google Bookmarks
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr

United Airlines gets smacked by social media

True story.  Dave Carroll, lead singer for the country group ‘Sons of Maxwell’ watched in horror as United Airwaves baggage handlers tossed around and eventually broke his $3,500 Taylor guitar (Read the full story on the bands website).   After nine months of run-around and an almost comic disregard for the consequence of their actions, United was no closer to taking responsibility for the damage. In frustration Dave promised the airline he would write three (not just one…) songs about the incident. This one is the first.  It has already received over 200,000 views online. The song is sort of catchy.

How could the airline be so inept? Does United Airlines care now? Didn’t they know not to mess with musicians?

Video sharing, social networks and the ability to easily spread your message far and wide are all important factors causing (most) companies to reconsider how they deal with their customers. Up until very recently you had to commit a pretty heinous act against a customer for anyone to take notice. Now anyone with a computer, a video camera and a grievance can cause your company a considerable amount of pain.

Spending millions on generic positioning ads won’t amount to much if you choose to ignore your customers and if you choose to ignore social media.

Share This
  • email
  • Print
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • LinkedIn
  • Google Bookmarks
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr

New GM video – a bad way to (re)start

“This is about getting down to business. Because the only chapter we’re focused on is Chapter One.”  What a load of crap! Do advertising writers really believe that cliches and slogans are the most effective way to communicate?

You missed ‘electric’, ‘efficient’, ‘quality’ and many other important ’trends’,  you’ve mismanaged one of the world’s largest and most important companies and now you are in bankruptcy protection… so what do you do?

You release a cliche riddled, generic video with predictable imagery that promises a ‘new beginning’, a’ fresh start’. The only thing missing is the waving flag and Bob Seger music. {Note, I watched the video again after posting and realized there is a waving flag, my bad.} 

This is a watershed moment for GM and its advertsing agency and yes, one day after bankruptcy filing is very early in the game, but if GM wants to signal that things have truly changed then the first signal to the market should be in it’s advertising/PR. This one minute ad could have been created five or fifty years ago, for any company. There is nothing genuine, informative or interesting in this video, nothing to signal to the world that things really are changing – it’s just more of the same.

GM will emerge from bankruptcy protection – it has to. It will be smaller and will have blown out many of the questionable lines it once supported. It will be leaner and perhaps meaner. It will also have to start communicating in a very different fashion. Informative may be a good place to start. Honest is good too. Inspiring would be ideal if that were possible.

Note: Blocking comments on YouTube is also a really bad start.

Share This
  • email
  • Print
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • LinkedIn
  • Google Bookmarks
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr

Channel creates more video (film) art to promote their brand

 

When you own a premium brand you have to spend premium dollars to support it.

Channel has just released their newest commercial / mini-movie and as before, have done a wonderful job. Last time it was Nicole Kidman in a three minute short film (or a three minute long commercial). This time around Audrey Tautou – one of France’s national treasures – graces the screen for Channel. North Americans might remember her as ‘Amelie’ in one of the few French films to get theatre time back in 2001. The Director of that film – Jean-Pierre Jeunet directs this commercial and was given a free hand in creating Channel’s newest filmette. Naturally he cast his favourite actress (it didn’t hurt that Tautou is also playing Coco Channel in the recently released film ’Coco Avant Channel’ in France) in the lead role.

The story (not that it matters a whit) centres around a chance encounter on a train to Istanbul. Tautou spends the remaining two minutes waiting and hoping to hook up with the handsome stranger. A sudden romance on a night train to an exotic destination – ya, it`s cliche. Romance and mystery and the promise of adventure – that`s what you buy when you drop $100 or more for a little bottle of purfume – the promise of something exciting. That`s exactly what Channel is selling, and they are quite good at it.

You have to give Jeunet top marks for his direction. He spared no expense (watch `the making of` to see what kind of coin they dropped on this little video) at creating some asbolutely stunning sequences. He`s come a long way since his last big North American film - he directed the last Alien film (I think it was called Alien Abomination). Like the perfume Jeunet is selling, this video won`t be for everyone  but for those who it targets, he hits the mark perfectly.

Share This
  • email
  • Print
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • LinkedIn
  • Google Bookmarks
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr

t-mobile creates another viral ‘event’.

A few months a go it was a flash mob dancing in Liverpool station. This time around it’s a sing-along in Trafalgar Square.

T-Mobile continues to embrace event-based promotions to support their Life’s for Sharing  marketing campaign. It’s working well for them. T-Mobile enticed a large crowd (mob) to gather in Trafalgar square to take part in a massive ‘dance activity’ -  like the Liverpool stunt, but bigger. Instead of dancing (selected) people were handed microphones and the mob was encouraged to belt out a fourteen thousand strong version of Hey Jude. Multiple cameras throughout the audience captured the love.

The video makes you smile and I have to imagine that Sir Paul approves (legally or otherwise). While it is different in structure from the Liverpool Station video it is similar enough in approach that I don’t believe it will create quite the same buzz this time around. It’s still better than most viral videos in that it directly and obviously supports a specific market positioning – ‘Lifes for Sharing’, it is very well done and it is very engaging (very shareable). I imagine T-Mobile will  be back at it in a few months with something even ‘newer and fresher.’

The back-story around these events is almost as important as the events themselves. Pink was in the crowd to perform a few songs and to work the crowd into a performance-ready pitch. There are as many “I was this close to Pink” camera phone videos as there are “This is me taking part in the song” videos on YouTube. This participatory approach is very smart as it promotes viral and social engagement .

It’s interesting to wade through the criticism of these types of events: “It’s fake”, “It’s staged”, “It’s just a big ad for T-Mobile”. Sure it is, so what? All those people and cameras… and Pink…  didn’t show up on their own. One blogger commented that she refused payment to promote the event on her blog and was torn about even mentioning the video. I’m surprised that people still don’t realize that video seeding and PR and a million other promotional activities are an integral (essential) part of the ‘viral’ success of these videos.

Share This
  • email
  • Print
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • LinkedIn
  • Google Bookmarks
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr

Are viral videos just sponsored entertainment?

 

Who would bother forwarding an infomercial on to a friend?

Millions of people as it turns out. The above video is a rap remix of the original Slap Chop video that already has 1.4 million views. This video has been seen by close to 900,000 people and other versions (they’ve ’sliced and diced’ the original into a variety of styles and formats) have been viewed hundreds of thousands of times. These numbers don’t include  the  parody videos that are now starting to surface. That’s millions of views for an infomercial.

Vince Shlomi- the presenter who helped to make the owners of the ShamWow product a lot of money is back with another over-the-top delivery that heralds the glory of this new kitchen chopping device. It’s campy, it’s silly, and it’s exhausting but it does something that most other viral videos do not: it sells. It demonstrates the features and benefits of the product very clearly. And it is memorable.

The top commercial viral video at the moment is the Samsung Extreme Sheep LED Art video. (8 million views) It’s clever and fun to watch but has little, if any connection to the Samsung LED monitors it ‘promotes’. Most viral videos are really ’sponsored entertainment’ with a very weak direct link to the product or service they are supposed to promote. Viral video producers are very careful to point out to advertisers that being to ’salesy’ will turn viewers off (and also lessen their chances of winning awards).

The  T-mobile Dance video by contrast is absolutely brilliant and does what many viral videos do not – it includes the product and the experience (in this case – people sharing the moment with their camera-phones) as part of the video. Certainly the connection is not overt – but at least there is an obvious connection. Going from the hearding of  light-suit adorned sheep to large screen television screen is a bit more of a stretch.

Entertainment should never be the goal – if it is then you should sell tickets. Effectiveness should be the measure of success. Did your video sell product, inform your customers and prospects or ’support the brand’ in a meaningful way?

Will Slap Chop win any awards?  No way. It will be ridiculed by ’serious’ marketers.

Did it entertain?  If you are a big ‘kitchen demo rap’ fan – then it delivered the goods.

Did it help to raise awareness of the product?  Absolutely!

Was it memorable?  I won’t soon forget it.

Did it help to sell product? I don’t know the numbers but I would have to say yes – if for no other reason than all of the Slap Chop parody video creators having to rush out and buy the device to use in their parody videos. (Perhaps that is a new sub-market.)

Share This
  • email
  • Print
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • LinkedIn
  • Google Bookmarks
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr

What do you do when parody strikes your company?

I posted yesterday about the unfortunate circumstance that Domino’s Pizza found itself in having been the subject of a horrendously inappropriate ‘prank’ video that will likely cost them millions of dollars in lost revenue and PR fees. While Domino’s acted quickly and dealt with the issue head on it is less clear how a business should respond if they are the victim of something more subtle – the parody video. 

Microsoft found itself the victim of a very well produced parody video that took a shot at the marketing video they had created  to promote their new Surface technology. Microsoft’s video was very well produced, the subject matter was fascinating and it positioned Microsoft as leading a new generation of communication and interactive technology. The video received over 2 million views on YouTube. A success by any measure… that is until the good folks at Sarcastic Gamer created their own version of the video that closes with the delicously sarcastic line ”The future is here, and it’s a big-ass table… take that Apple!” Ouch.

To add insult to injury the parody video has received more views than Microsoft’s original video. Double ouch.

When I originally viewed the Microsoft video my first thought was ‘cool.’ Months later when I saw the parody video I have to admit I did revisit the rationale for my first impressions. The parody video did an excellent job at turning many of the purported benefits into something much less, even to the point of causing some of those benefits to now appear trivial or even counter-intuitive.

I’ll assume that Google or Apple or Dell or… whoever, didn’t pay Sarcastic Gamer to produce the video to ridicule their competition. (Would it surprise you if they had?) You can’t anticipate where or why these things will happen, but you do have to be aware of the possibility and think through how your company should respond.

So what do you do when parody strikes your company? Stick to your guns and continue to make your case clearly and positively without letting your detractors set the communications agenda? Or do face the issue head on and deal with it as a serious and competitive threat that could have an immediate and significant effect on your brand?

There was no grey zone in Domino’s response to the prank video. They had to act. That said, the line between prank and parody can be rather fuzzy. This is new territory for most companies. The ability of a single individual (or group) to affect a company’s brand has never been greater. That should be a huge wake-up call.

Share This
  • email
  • Print
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • LinkedIn
  • Google Bookmarks
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr

Dominos uses YouTube to respond to PR Crisis.

Video is a powerful media. A couple of idiots employed by Domino’s Pizza will probably cost the fast food company millions in lost revenue as a result of the ‘prank’ video they placed on YouTube showing themselves performing a number of disgusting acts to the food they were preparing prior to it being send out. It is unclear whether the food they were defiling actually made it out the door – they claim it did not. (They have since been fired and a federal warrant has been issued for their arrest.)

Unfortunately the damage is done and Domino’s now has to deal with a public relations nightmare. Domino’s has fired back with a YouTube video of their own with a very tired looking President (Patrick Doyle) outlining the steps the fast food chain will take to ensure that this doesn’t happen again.

Responding with a video on YouTube makes sense and I assume they will employ other media as well in an effort to restore public confidence. The video is measured and in two minutes Patrick Doyle covers most of what needed to be said. The video looks like it was put together quickly which, under the circumstances is understandable. Doyle doesn’t make eye contact with the camera – which is unfortunate as he seems to be reading cue cards up and to the left of the camera. Renting a teleprompter, or better yet, delivering an unscripted speech to the camera would have served the company better.

This is a teribble thing for a company to go through and an example of why firms hire PR agencies to help them with disaster planning. Unfortunately the ubiquity of video devices and ease of transmission will guarantee that this could happen again - to any company. Video will play an important role in responding to these crises.

Share This
  • email
  • Print
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • LinkedIn
  • Google Bookmarks
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr

“This ain’t Flint” – When new media campaigns go horribly wrong.

 this-aint-flint1
This ain’t Calcutta or Abuja or Port-au-Prince either. So what.
This Ain’t Flint is a campaign developed by Alphabet Creative for Newcap Radio ostensibly to remind the good folks of Ottawa, Canada to stop whining because things are really not that bad – compared to the economic hardship that Flint, Michigan has had to face. The Newcap radio group has put a lot of money and effort into a campaign that includes video, a website, transit ads, and other promotional activities. 
We live in one of the best cities in one of the best countries in the world. We are privileged beyond any reasonable measure.  I wish this campaign would go away. I’ve tried to ignore it and the discussion around it for the last couple of weeks. Problem is, it’s hard to ignore. I keep driving by “This Ain’t Flint” transit ads every day. So if I can’t will it away… the next best thing to do is to rate it. Here is how I would score this campaign:
Embarrassment.  10/10 They knocked it out of the park with embarrassment. I have friends and relatives in Michigan and I am ashamed to be associated (geographically) with this campaign. Read a couple US blogs to get a sense for how this campaign is been perceived south of the border. Ouch.
Harmfullness  8/10 . A bit more planning could have given the campaign a higher harm score. This campaign will probably affect tourism, trade or anything else with the good folks in Flint / Michigan / US … frankly anyone who needs a reason to dislike our Nation’s Capital. “Hey honey come here, Ottawa looks real nice compared to Flint… let’s go there this summer.” (Of course this isn’t the intent of the video and campaign… just the outcome.)
Confusion 5/10. Hard to rate this one. The message is absolutely clear (Ottawa isn’t as hard done by as Flint )- so I’d give this part a fail.  But the purpose of the video is a mystery so I’d give the campaign folks full marks for confusion here. What’s the point? I don’t get it. The demonic baby, the strange video, the lack of an obvious audience, or purpose. They didn’t make it to get people to buy more radio ads so what was the purpose?
Creepiness. 10 / 10. The freaky doll was a masterstroke! Nothing picks up the spirits each day like the bus shelter image of a horror movie doll. Bravo!
Lack of Originality. 8  /10. Everyone knows that viral video is all about copying something that has already been done. Kudo’s to the ‘Roger and Me’ treatment in the first half of the video and the shockingly disjoint Ottawa Tourism video in the second half. Although ‘Freaky Doll’ has been done many times before (still a huge ‘Chucky’ fan),  it hasn’t been done in conjunction with an ‘economic optimism’ video before so I had to knock a few marks off  here.
Ballsiness. 9/10. You have to have Kahunas to launch this campaign knowing that uncreative, tree-hugging, left-wing sensitive types will find something to dislike about it. A change of heart – putting the video up on YouTube and then quickly removing it – cost the campaign a perfect score. (Why purposely avoid using the best free social media channel on the  planet?) All comments are good comments right!
 
Share This
  • email
  • Print
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • LinkedIn
  • Google Bookmarks
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr