Bonehead Roundup
December 21st, 2007
Before the Brains on Fire blog goes silent for four or five days, I wanted to point out a couple of things that have been bugging me. I know, I know it’s hard to believe that I want to rant about some things, but I’ll give it a try:
May I ask what the criteria was for “word-of-mouth strategy” in this study? It seems like everybody these days are claiming that they do WOMM. In some cases they are actually doing it and in too many other cases it’s something like an “attention grabbing direct mail that is so engaging that people will tell others about it.” That ain’t WOMM. That’s crap.
Which brings me back to my original question: What was the criteria? In other words, my guess is that’s LESS than even the 24% that Ketchum found.
2) I received an email on Wednesday entitled, “Did you hear the one about Florence Henderson and the Revolting Microbes?” The folks at agion sent us a form email letting us know that they launched a viral campaign. Here is the text from the email – word for unbelievable word:
I would like to share some exciting news with you and your readers! Agion, a global leader in naturally safe antimicrobial solutions, has launched the “That’s Revolting!” viral video campaign (www.ThatsRevolting.com) starring Florence Henderson, America’s favorite TV mom. Shot on the original (but reconfigured) set of the classic ‘70’s TV sitcom that made Henderson an American icon, “That’s Revolting!” features Henderson as the mom in a whacked family that’s inadvertently passing microbes to each other in a series of over-the-top comedic videos. Florence also plays the perennially cheerful host, who urges web viewers to ‘Spot the Germs’ before family members get ill with everything from Flesh Eating Bacteria to Salmonella. It’s fun for the whole family!
You know what? I actually checked it out. And it’s terrible.
Not only did you break most all the rules Ogilvy’s Blogger Outreach Code of Ethics, but for the umpteenth time, like the boys at coBrandit say: You don’t put a viral video out on the web. You put a video out on the web. A viral video is just a video until it GOES VIRAL. You can’t claim it’s viral until it happens.
3) Speaking of viral videos, this one isn’t really calling out any boneheads as much as it is just an observation. Time recently posted the Top 10 Viral Videos for 2007. And you know how many of them were for products or services? None. Yes, some of them were professionally produced, but they weren’t selling anything. And more than half were either user generated content or just moments caught on tape. So take note all you companies out there wanting a “viral video” to push your product or service. After all that hard work and money, it’ll probably just get lost in the YouTube jungle.
Other posts by Spike.
olivier Blanchard says:
1) “You don’t put a viral video out on the web. You put a video out on the web. A viral video is just a video until it GOES VIRAL. You can’t claim it’s viral until it happens.”
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
2) “Time recently posted the Top 10 Viral Videos for 2007. And you know how many of them were for products or services? None.”
Wow. That’s a hell of a wakeup call for any company still looking to emulate the so-called “success” of CP+B/BK’s Talking Chicken and subsequent string of lame carbon copies.
It blows my mind that the majority of marketing firms and ad agencies still look at WOMM “tactics” (don’t get me started) as means to draw attention to the advertising/content they produce rather than the product, service or (user/community) experience offered by their client.
Tsk…
December 21st, 2007 at 10:06 amSpike says:
Thanks for the chime-in, O.
And great observation on the whole WOM tactics thing. I have a post a-brewin’ about that very subject.
December 21st, 2007 at 10:45 amMr. Steve says:
Okay, so this thought has been bubbling in my head for a little while, and I think it’s time to put it out there to see if it makes sense:
It seems to me that agencies and companies that are trying to create a “viral” video/campaign/waste of internet space are the same types of people that saw the success of “The Blair Witch Project”, and thought that ANY movie made for $1000 had the potential to be a big hit. We know that it has to be of quality, first and foremost. And it has to be genuine. Seriously. BWP wasn’t made by a big powerhouse production company trying to look like the every man…it was made by the average joe, who just happened to have a great idea, a lot of talent, and the drive to see it through.
These forced viral videos feel wrong…they almost feel like Rodney Dangerfield rapping (for those of you fortunate enough to miss that aural masterpiece, consider yourself lucky)…the execution is shoddy, but the lack of a deeper connection behind it is almost embarrassing.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:35 pmJake McKee says:
I’ve been saying for years… how about we make it good, rather than “viral”?
December 22nd, 2007 at 5:49 amHayward says:
Just out of curiosity…isn’t the end result of any tactic sales? Don’t your clients want to sell something. So this doesn’t make sense to me:
“Yes, some of them were professionally produced, but they weren’t selling anything. And more than half were either user generated content or just moments caught on tape.”
What makes a video successful if it’s not sales they are after? If it’s just image building then that would hopefully lead to sales but didn’t Ogilvy himself stand behind the fact the branding and advertising had to drive sales.
There’s a great post on that subject here:
http://dimbulb.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/12/i-miss-david-og.html
December 22nd, 2007 at 7:33 am