Begging the Question – Is Questionable Execution Worth A Good Buzz?

Just like most marketers, I’m always looking for innovative ways to draw attention and get the message out.  Sometimes, a bunch of buzz is generated for an execution that seems – on the surface – like it is a brilliant use of the technology.  Unfortunately, when you actually check it out, it leaves a little to be desired when it comes to actually conveying the product’s narrative.  One such case is the French adventure/outdoor products company, Quechua, and the Facebook Timeline piece they launched yesterday to launch their new commercial. The concept was cool, but in practice, the experience was clunky and actually acted counter to the product they were trying to promote.  It certainly begs the question whether buzz about marketing products is good even when that execution is not all it can be.

The Quechua Experiment is getting buzz specifically as the “First Scrollable Commercial on Facebook Timeline.”  I don’t know how much people were waiting for that feat to be attained, but the buzz it’s generating is technically correct. In this case, is that such a cool thing or just a media hook?  When a user goes to www.facebook.com/QuechuaExperiment, they are asked to scroll down on their timeline and push the equivalent “more” button 15 times.  Once at the bottom, press both the SHIFT and SPACE buttons to start the frame-by-frame movement upwards through the images in the Timeline.

Essentially, they are trying to explain the benefits of their 2 second tent with a web mechanic that, annoyingly, takes much longer to experience. When you look at the “video”, it provides beautiful imagery that makes people want to camp out in the wilderness and, at the end, shows how simple it is to break the tent down when you are done. It’s frustrating because we always talk about how interactivity makes the experience deeper for the user – yet this interactivity takes away from the original source of the information, which is the beautiful video.  If all you are getting is another version of the video, is it worth it? It should have been as quick and simple as the ”flick of a wrist” that it takes to set up the tent…

Courtesy of Quechua

The company seems to be cutting-edge in general – not just in the materials they use, but in their marketing.  One such example is a beautiful commercial for their products – melding the campers and the environment beautifully – and then enabling a rich behind the scenes environment through technology to explore more. I give them and their agency, Fred + Farid credit for trying new things with this Facebook Timeline execution, but I think the actual mechanics of it miss the mark.

I can’t fault them as they are getting buzz about it. I’m just saddened when a good mechanic is not optimized to become a great marketing product.  With the emphasis being placed on being the first ones to try something, you really want that “first time” to be something really special.  I don’t feel they’ll get anything negative from this and I definitely wouldn’t have known about their products had it not been for the buzz – so that’s a positive for them.  I’m just looking at it as a marketing product, and the full mechanic didn’t convey the product benefits as best it could have. I almost would have rather them had a tongue-in-cheek message that it will take longer for the user to experience the marketing than it would to either set up the tent or take it down.

In the end, I would rather the good buzz support a good marketing mechanic – something that better conveys the product. Additionally, except for in the most extreme cases, buzz is mostly good for a product. I’m always up for some good buzz – I just get disheartened when it leads to a marketing execution that is not all it could have been.

Through a Haze, Sometimes The Most Lame Things Seem Brilliant

I’m sort of sad that I missed the announcement on April 20th about an online game celebrating the Grateful Dead.  The timing of the announcement and the official launch was the only thing that really makes sense to me. Though it is a little too “spot on” with a release on that date for a jam band that was as much known for its relationship to drugs as it was for the actual music, the annual date celebrating marijuana (4/20) is perfect for them. Sadly, by my missing that date, it sheds a light on everything that is not right with the product itself. But as I’ve maintained a lot over the years, staying true to the story is the most important thing. This one really makes me question whether it is really brilliant in being lame…

Adam Blumenthal, a representative of the game’s creator (Curious Sense) seemed to echo Rhino’s aims of staying away from the drug references and going after a younger demographic:

“There’s nothing explicit,” said Blumenthal, who was bound to keep the game family friendly. “The visuals are psychedelic, they’re fantastical, they’re colorful, they’re whimsical but no drug references.”

That’s fine if the primary goal weren’t to collect “seed” to be able to deal with obstacles and get to the next level. In Blumenthal’s defense, he didn’t say that there was nothing implicit. Beyond that, the gameplay is somewhat old-school and I don’t know that it would actually draw in a younger audience that the gatekeepers are looking for.

But, you could argue that the game, the music, the release date and much more work perfectly as extensions of the band.  The game creators even declined to have an end to the game specifically because it didn’t make sense to – in relation to the band and its music. The band and its followers (Dead Heads) were always thought of as being salt of the earth-type people, so the simplicity of the game might have something to do with it. In reality, the music was something that you could just drop into and stay within for days. It wasn’t about the long jams alone – it was about the type of music and the people who followed it. The game makes use of music from ten concerts that are thought to be some of their greatest.  As you travel through the levels, players are treated to huge amounts of those jams.

It wasn’t unusual to run into Dead Heads who followed the group around for tens of shows or more in a row. The scene surrounding the shows were almost as entertaining as the shows  themselves. Were they the best band ever? Doubtful.  But the vibe they presented was something else that brought a type of fan that is rare.

So, if the game makers and the gatekeepers of the Dead were looking to extend the essence of what the Grateful Dead was all about for a new audience (and even re-invigorating the old audience) – where you can lose yourself for a number of hours – they seem to have pulled it off brilliantly.

Fear Forces Social Television To Grow Up

TV Guide just released a survey about Social TV and the Mass Market and while I don’t know how many people were included in the survey, one thing that stood out was the top reason for people to share what they are watching.  When asked “Why do you share what you’re watching,” the leading response was not “To tell my friends which shows I watch.” Leading the way with 76% was the reasoning that they do it to help keep their favorite shows on the air.  That’s a huge component – and not a new topic on the list (it was second last year) – that points to the growing maturity (and perhaps cynicism) of the audience. When fans are using social media to try to manipulate the business behind their favorite shows, it’s a sign of growing up that evokes the sense of nostalgia or loss a parent might have when their child starts realizing that Santa, the tooth fairy and leprechauns don’t exist. If the numbers are true, it’s too bad that social media surrounding television has grown up with a bit more fear than innocent discovery.

There has been social outreach that has led to shows being saved in the past (Friday Night Lights and Roswell come quickly to mind.)  A few months ago, Daisy Whitney wrote about the correlation between social buzz and ratings - with the report from Nielsen that, for the 18-34 age group, a 9% increase in social relates to a 1% increase in ratings. But, neither of these directly relates to the fan’s somewhat bizarre use of social to trigger business decisions.  much like parents would not want their children to engage in the family finances, should the providers of television content want the viewers to feel that they have to do anything but love (and interact with) the show to keep it on the air?

With the viewer’s time investment in shows that have no assuredness they will actually remain on the air, perhaps the social action is something they can do to feel that they are affecting the eventual outcomes. And sadly, it seems they feel  that they have to do such a thing as somewhat of a defensive tactic.

There are so many opportunities for social buzz as it relates to celebrating – and even extending the narrative – for beloved shows. With the growing periods of time between seasons for a number of series, there is a need for more social programming to keep the audiences engaged.  Three Showtime series (SHAMELESS, HOUSE OF LIES and CALIFORNICATION) had season finales this past weekend and will not return with new episodes until winter of 2013 – that’s a long time to keep interest up.  Maintaining a flow of social content could help keep interest there. With an even shorter hiatus of nine months, the season 2 premiere the series, THE KILLING on AMC only brought in 1.8 million total viewers. While those numbers are still decent in this fragmented world, its a half million less than the amount who watched the season finale on June 19, 2011. Again, leveraging social to keep viewers engaged rather than letting them fend for themselves could have helped to generate more awareness.

I’ve always felt that social could be a better tool for exploration rather than maintenance. The thing is, there’s often a responsibility tied to the narrative of the show and the question of who “owns” that progression.  In most cases, the show runners or owners would not want to give that control to the users.  Without opening up the opportunities for conversation beyond the latest episode or a show’s “Who Shot J.R.?” question, there’s not really a lot users can dig into during the hiatus.

It then comes down to economics.  Networks have the model of promoting a show when it is actually on the air. The owners of the shows are in the best position to activate campaigns that bridge the gap because they control the show narratives, but they usually don’t have the budgets set up to handle any such campaign. There are many reasons this should change – beyond just retaining fans through long breaks – that we’ll dig into in a later post. I guess it comes down to who needs those viewers more, the show or the network. The answer is probably shared right down the middle to some extent.

So, at some point, the kids caught on to how the adults were doing things and innocence was lost. Some would argue that its hardest to foster true creativity and connection from fear. It would be better for all involved if the fear of a show being cancelled was not the top reason, by a large margin, for people to be involved in a show’s social activity. Time and again, it has been proven that people relate and connect to things that have a narrative or emotional hook more than those with just mechanical activities. The “saving the world” narrative might work for some shows’ fans - probably for limited periods of time – but to truly maintain and build a fan base, there needs to be a shift from fear to celebration/engagement in terms of social media and television.

Becoming Numb to the Screaming and Welcoming the Whisper

Back when I was developing movies and miniseries for television, I lamented how the broadcast products were being placed against premium cable products during awards season as they had a fundamental difference – broadcast movies had to have a seven act format that required some heightened element to draw people through the commercial break while cable movies were able to maintain a traditional three act format.  When comparing the two, I even felt that the traditional was more palpable as there was no annoying manufactured cliff-hangers or “Fake High” leading into each commercial break.  Looking at other forms of storytelling, I enjoyed and had emotional connections to the instances where they were able to convey narrative, and just plain breathe. 

Now, it seems like everything is reliant on the ultra-kinetic energy that was witnessed in those days of longform television.  Even watching television shows on pay cable that have no commercials has become exhausting as it feels like they’re afraid you’re going to walk away or change to another show that’s saved in your DVR.  Maybe its not because of our collective ADD, but because of our collective desensitization to all things shocking.  We’re not just talking graphic elements, but storyline as well.  Some of our favorite protagonists are serial killers, drug dealers, meth manufacturers, vampires and they just get zanier by the season. Images of death, destruction, sexuality, insanity and grossness just don’t register as being different or exceptional like it used to. 

We’re also seeing this type of reaction to the general population’s higher threshhold for advertising gimmicks and attention grabbers.  Just a few years ago, there was an outrage when Calvin Klein posted billboards with the following image:

Now, those types of images are standard in billboards.  It seems that there might be a fuss when one campaign does something shocking, but then we all forget about it and it becomes the norm.

But this isn’t about billboards.  It’s about the drive to just do something that will grab people’s attention but with seemingly no attempt to even convey what the product is – either through storytelling or description.

One such example of late is the commercial for Toshiba’s Thrive Tablet.  It is all about noise with giving no details about the product other than saying its the “First one to get it right.”  Huh?  With iPad being the leader nowadays and the the fact that they convey the multiple uses of their tablet in every outlet possible, why would Toshiba think this is a good use of their advertising dollars?

We’ve always seen the same thing in TV, Movie and Home Entertainment Television spots – where the emphasis is on breathtaking images and review lines without conveying much, if any part, of the story.  The thing I hear as being so good about RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES is the humanity and storytelling.  It is almost like the special effects are just an assist to that instead of the main focus.  If you watch any of the spots on TV, all it shows is action, reviews and one out-of-context intimate moment between two apes.  I’ll see it because I am a fan of the franchise, but my intent is not helped by the spots.

There is so much emphasis put on “New” and “Groundbreaking” when it comes to marketing these days that it is collectively losing any meaning or power.  It reminds me of the early days of the internet when ads were just made to flash on and off or have a starburst around it or some lights or more lights.  it all became just a bunch of nothing.  We’re seeing it today where the rich media expandable ads provide no additional experience or connection that a standard unit could not have smartly shown.  There is such a drive for data but no real push for analysis and real strategy.

I recognize that Social Media is still relatively nascent, but many people are looking at it as their bully pulpit by just shooting stuff out into the ether with no real plan for enhancing engagement or community. 

This post is all over the place – just like all of the media exploding at consumers – it all just seems like noise.  The true challenge is to just take a breath and begin the connection to the audience or consumer.  The communication does not need to be loud – just thoughtful and well targeted.

It is much more easily said than done, but we’ve got to find a way to make our screams matter and our whispers mean even more.

We See The Future And It Ain’t So Far Away

The following campaign blurb was really exciting until the third line where it describes throwing a consumer on the top of a van:

The makers of Stride gum will go to extreme lengths to have consumers upgrade to Stride 2.0. Stride’s CEO, a human billboard at a mall, accosts a consumer unwilling to upgrade his gum. The CEO hops on a skateboard and chases the young man throughout the mall, eventually catching him and throwing him atop a waiting van. After switching the gum, the CEO hops into the van, driven by snowboarder Shaun White.

Stride is usually pretty good at being ahead of the curve technology-wise (incorporating color QR codes early-on) so I was assuming they were doing the same here.  The thing is, it was all just in a video created by JWT NEW YORK. And it did not happen in a real environment like I was hoping.

I thought they had taken the step that might have been thought of as Science Fiction Fantasy when the billiboards were interacting with consumers in the film, MINORITY REPORT.  That fantasy is absolutely doable now with the progress in RFID, displays, bluetooth, wi-fi and cloud-computing.  You can see elements of it in place in Japan and you will see more of it here when Apple incorporates RFID in iPhone 5.

Companies have made good use of RFID on a limited scale for marketing with the strongest example being the Israel Coca-Cola Village event last Summer that incorporated Facebook. That experience made it simple, immediate and cool to share socially, but there are so many opportunities to build a phenomenal narrative and emotional connection with consumers in the near future.

In simplest terms, imagine that the Stride video was cut into pieces so that consumers could feel that they were the ones being followed through a mall like the Culver City Westfield – where the video was actually filmed.  As the user with an RFID transmitter passed by the specific displays, the videos could be presented progressively - taking them through the narrative.  Certainly, within the next 6-9 months, those folks who have the RFID transmitter would be the most likely to like and engage with the guy pestering them – they just don’t seem like the types who would get annoyed by it.  As part of the experience, there would hopefully be kiosks that allow interaction – whether just posting to FB or registering to get a coupon sent to their email or SMS.

This really is not so far in the future – with a number of groups already developing the technology.  It just takes a strong advertiser with the correct target audience (like Stride is going after) to pull the trigger smartly.  It can be done on a small scale in strategically placed locations.  But, don’t forget to get all your ducks in a row to have your PR and Digital teams ready to pounce and leverage all the buzz, video, etc to turn it into something much bigger than a local execution.

Also, don’t forget to credit Scarlet Strategic with the idea.  Better yet, come to us and we’ll execute the whole thing for you!