Air New Zealand has developed an air safety video that has already received over four million Internet views. Given the subject matter, that’s quite remarkable. Sure the people delivering the instructions are naked (except for body paint made to look like airline uniforms) but that’s not what has everyone’s attention, is it?
It’s a great creative concept that is well executed. The video is fun to watch, the production values are very good and it manages, for whatever reason… to keep your attention. Try as you might you’ll see very little ‘skin’ in the video. The video also does something which may be more important than imparting valuable safety tips to its passengers – it positions the airline as a creative and open-minded organization. It’s difficult to imagine a North American airline approving this creative concept – and yet I can also imagine many of those same disapproving business leaders asking ‘why don’t we do something like this?’ around the executive water cooler.
They also follow-up with some bloopers – another smart idea as ‘related video’ material is becoming standard fare for web-based video campaigns. The true mark of success will be if a legion of parody videos develops around this concept.
Rich media with video drives success more than four times that of Flash according to a new report from DoubleClick and Dynamic Logic. This is just one of many findings detailed in a survey commissioned by Google that looks at the impact of ad format selection on branding results.
According to the reserach, online ads using audio and video achieve a greater impact on Brand Awareness at a lower frequency exposure frequency than other standard online ad formats. In fact, exposure to audio/video ads increases Brand Awareness by 10.0 percentage points.
Exposing viewers to ads containing video also increased the ‘favourability’ of the brand. Viewers perceptions of the brand were more positive simply because of the presence of video – as compared to static or animated flash ads.
Video ads also had significantly higher (aided) brand awareness scores compared to other rich media and static ads.
Bottom line – the study indicates that people who see video in a rich media ad are more likely to make the purchase – compared with static images or flash animation. Considering the prevalence of non-video based ads on the web this study should be a wake-up call to agencies who continue to build static web-based ads for their clients.
Like every tourist destination in the world, the State of Florida is looking for new ways to attract visitors during tough economic times. They engaged Spark - a Tampa agency to help them build a ‘social video campaign’ to spread the word and ‘Share a little sunshine.’
The promotion began with the above video which is basically a call to action to all Floridians to help boost tourist trade – an integral part of the Florida economy. So far so good. {Unfortunately the campaign got off to a bumpy start as many YouTube posts complained that the poster board concept (which goes back to Bob Dylan’s 1965 Subterranean Homesick Blues Video video) was ‘stolen’ from a very touching YouTube video entitled Mark by Ben - a plea by a Florida boy to help find work for his father.}
A website and promotional campaign was created to encourage keen Floridians to pass along the good word. The website includes one of three commercials – ‘Romance’, ‘family’, ‘friends’ that participants are encouraged to forward with the promise of a chance to win valuable prizes with each new email sent.
The State missed a huge opportunity here. Offering a prize for emailing these videos to friends and family is a good idea but I don’t think it’s enough. Sure it’s easy to do and sweepstakes and contests will always guarantee a certain amount of interaction. I just don’t believe that the recipients, if they actually watch the commercials, will care. If someone sent me an email with a tourist commercial from their town I may start watching it, but it better be really good, or have a compelling message or story. These videos were obviously created on a very tight budget and certainly don’t reinforce all of the beautiful stereotypes of the Sunshine State. These stereotypes, (Eiffel Tower, Venetian Canals, Manhattan Skyline, etc.) are one of the main reasons people choose travel destinations. Yes, reminding people of important social hooks (friends, family and romance) is interesting but there is limited direct connection to Florida other than the fact that someone from the state may (or may not) have forwarded it to you.
There is a place for high quality video and a place for lower-budget video. The problem is that the lower quality video better have something else going for it or it won’t get noticed.
A better option would have been to create or purchase a lot of excellent quality b-roll video and encourage Floridians to create their own tourist videos using as much of the supplied high quality b-roll video as they wanted. The uptake might have been more limited but the viral potential for these videos would have been a hundred times greater – as would the impact.
A contest to forward commercials is not a social marketing campaign, it’s a contest – that’s it. Give people the incentives (the contest and the ‘Help support your state’ video) AND give them the tools to create compelling videos with themselves in the video – now you have the potential for some exponential growth in both viewership and impact.
Some videos would be great – especially if you give the people excellent source material to insert in the videos and some would be pretty bad. But even the bad ones would be good because they would have real people in them and these people would want to forward these videos on to their friends and family and their family and friends would want to watch them and forward them on to other people.
Unfortunately, this campaign results in the worst of both worlds – lower budget commercials with limited social uptake.
Ogilvy and Mather developed a series of 30 ads to showcase value-added services offered by Indian’s second largest mobile carrier – Vodaphone. The ads have become very popular in India and are already being spun into other promotional activities. The ads are also doing very well on international viral video charts.
It’s interesting to note the feedback on YouTube – unanimously positive. (I’ve never seen that before.)Facebook is also buzzing with Zoozoo fever. Either Ogilvy has their promotional machine spun into overdrive or they have genuinely struck a nerve in India. You have to question some of the ‘buzz’ when you read a YouTube comment like “Express yourself with Vodaphone.” Regardless of whether the excitement is genuine or ‘enhanced’ you have to give Ogilvy & Mather credit. India is coocoo for Zoozoo.
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.
Starbucks is like Apple in many ways. It has a loyal – some would say fanatical – following, it sells a premium product and it differentiates itself on the experience around the product, rather than simply on the specific features/benefits of the product itself.
Apple however, seems to be flourishing (relatively speaking) during these tough economic times whereas Starbucks is searching to find it’s soul (and bottom line) and to remind everyone that there is still something very special about the Sbux experience.
Howard Shultz CEO of Starbucks is seen above in this video posted to the Starbucks YouTube channel. Although the stated audience for this video are the Starbucks ‘partners’ (employees) it is clear that the intent is to announce to the world that Starbucks is reaching out to all of its constituents – customers, prospects, influencers and employees to tell them that something ‘important’ is going on. (Hint – it’s really just a marketing campaign)
Starbucks is supporting a major marketing and advertising program (very unusual for Starbucks) through a number of social media activities such as YouTube video contests and ‘alerting’ twitter followers to watch out for the new campaign. Clearly you have to be a zealot to want to be notified of any one’s new marketing campaign.
The style of the video – honest, comfortable and personal is good – it supports the overall brand image and hints at something important going on. Just the same, after watching the video I can’t help but conclude – so what? I visit Starbucks mostly for off site meetings, the $4 coffee is just the cost of renting the furniture for a half an hour. Starbucks is not a movement or way of life for me no matter how hard they try to make it so.
I acknowledge that selling $4 coffee is tough during tough times. Interestingly one of the employee/partners ( all seemingly mandated to wear black ) mentions in the video that they do indeed offer alternatives to the $4 coffee. Starbucks cannot and will not be able to compete on price with anyone so I’m not sure mentioning this does them a lot of good.
I think the short term attention will improve their outlook for a time but I can’t help but think this is more than reaching out – it’s almost a cry for help to all the fanboys and girls out there to keep the faith and help to keep the Starbucks experience alive.
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.)
Once again Samsung have engaged the clever folks at The Viral Factory to develop a viral video to promote one of their latest products. Last time they went to Wales to video LED wrapped sheep (7.5 million views and counting) to promote Samsung’s line of ultrathin LED TV’s. This time they have created a viral video (and perhaps a new genre of viral video) that challenges the viewer to solve a visual trick shown in the video. This new video has already generated 650,ooo views and does a very nice job at demonstrating the quality of the HD video camera that comes with the new Samsung I8910 camera-phone. The video encourages viewers to watch the high-def version of the video to help in solving the riddle. The real purpose of that suggestion of course, is to show-off the quality of the HD video that is captured on the camera-phone.
Judging from the initial viewership and comments the video is already a success. A video response has already been posted using YouTube’s annotation capabilities to reveal the solution to the trick and provide detailed evidence to corroborate the solution.
Would people have watched this video without ‘the challenge’ – no way. If Samsung had created a traditional ad that simply and overtly promoted the high quality HD camera - it would not have spread virally. Nokia, Sony and many other consumer companies are beginning to realize that the reach and impact of a well executed viral video can be far more cost effective than a traditional broadcast ad.
That said, the challenge still remains in creating a video that is compelling enough for people to want to share it – to make it spread virally. Most attempts at viral video are not that compelling. (Calling it viral doesn’t make it so.)
… and broadacast advertisers still has the advantage that even if their ad is absolute crap, some people will still watch it.
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.
Ten years ago web-based flash garnered a lot of attention. Today video is the ‘media de jour’ for many companies – for lots of good reasons. But like any marketing tool or intiative (blogging, brochures, advertsing, events, etc.) you should have a plan in place and some measurable outcomes in mind before you start a video marketing project.
Last week, all on the same day, I had these conversations about using video as a marketing tool:
At a local ski resort. ‘Oh yes, we’re already doing video – check it out on our site!” Having done my homework before chatting with this company I had skimmed through the site and hadn’t noticed any video. I mentioned that to them and they told me where to find it. Point # 1. If you are going to go to the effort of making video feature it prominently (unless it’s really bad – then don’t use it ). Video gets the largest response of any media, keeps people on your site and is a great way to encourage a call-to-action, whatever that may be. The ski resort’s hidden video was less than impressive. It featured a young employee talking quickly about the local ski conditions that day. The video quality was poor and they didn’t show off any of the ski area. Point # 2. Video is a visual media – use it as such. Bad quality video has the same affect as bad writing, only its sticks with you longer. Say something interesting, show people the benefits of your product or services when you use video and try to achieve a level of professionalism that matches the intended professionalism of your establishment. Bad video doesn’t get a free pass because it is a new media.
At a local educational institution. ‘Oh we’ve tried video but we haven’t been happy with the results.” Not having done my homework on this one (shame on me) I had to defer to that comment and simply asked – “do you feature students in your videos?” The response, after a short pause – ‘oh yes’. The reality after checking the site – ‘not much’. Point # 3. Consider your audience. The site did have a number of videos on it – some institutional corporate videos, a number of the school’s faculty talking about courses and programs and a few students talking briefly about the institution. What was missing were students talking about and SHOWING other students in their voice, how cool and interesting life and learning were at the school. Video targeted at students should consider this critical question – Will students want to share this video? The answer to this question for this instituion was an emphatic ‘no’.
At a local tourist destination. “Yes we’ve been using video for a while now – we have video playing in our lobby”. My first thought was – ‘isn’t that a bit late in the purchasing cycle to be hitting customers with video – they’ve driven up to your destination, you’ve probably already sold them.” Point #4. The context and use of video is critical to the success of your intiative. Of course there are many great uses for in-store/location video such as cross-selling and up-selling and perhpas this was exactly how they were using the lobby video that they had created. Tourist destinations are a prime candidate for web-based video marketing – Why? Because if you create compelling video that highlight the features of your destination – that include testimonials. you might just get your customers to help you sell your services for you. This is the great potential of social marketing and social networks.
Video is great for website-based marketing and in-premises marketing but you should also create the tools that allow your customers and prospects to share your story.
