Adobe nimmt sich selbst – aber auch viele seiner Kunden in diesem satirischen Werbevideo auf die Schippe. Ich schätze alle kennen diverse Photoshop Fehler oder Übertreibungen, Schönheitskorrekturen, etc. Der legendäre Viral von Dove hat es vorgemacht. Hier ist die Version von denjenigen, die bei dem Unfug mithelfen:
Axe ist immer wieder für Überraschungen gut. Am 10. Januar startet die erste „softporn realtime graphic novel“ mit User Partizipation.
Wie das geht? Die User können Charaktere und Handlung ein wenig mitbestimmen, können sogar selbst in der Story auftauchen.
Hier ist ein Video dazu:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttnPGpDu3xg#!Auf dem YouTube Kanal können die User schon jetzt darüber abstimmen, welches Mädel die Hauptrolle spielt und in welcher Stadt, etc. das ganze stattfinden soll.
Natürlich gibt es auch einer „Trailer“ für die Story:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NN0-AWiv4kThe principle is a simple jump and run game. However in this case, you have to guide the female avatar across a range of well-known sites. From time to time, there are nice animations of the avatar interaction with the site in a surprising way.
Fascinating in terms of selection of sites and interaction with these sites. Not very sticking, though. Once you have visited a few sites, it does get a little boring, since the game play is not very special.
Just wondering: did they really get permission from all those brands to use their site-screenshots in a game? Respect to the account manager arranging all these deals.
Try it yourself: the Magnum Site-to-Site Travel Game.
Nice idea!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R55e-uHQna0(disclosure: my agency works for Volkswagen, but this particular clip is made by another agency)
We all enjoyed the subservient chicken for Burger King. We also enjoyed the Samsung „follow your instinct“ interactive Video story where you can choose how to proceed with the story by clicking on one of several button to continue different paths:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoOCiaxIZF4And we also like youtube advertising, that plays with the layout of the page, as in the movie promo for the Expendables.
Now, Tipp-Ex has combined those three and came up with a nice advertising Campaign:
You can choose – or shall I say it looks like you can choose – one of two endings. Warning, here is a spoiler:
You don’t have a choice. The bear won’t be shot, in both options the ad changes, the youtube special ad format kicks in and the guy grabs the Tipp-Ex from the box on the righthand side, deletes the word „shoots“ and tells you to tell him, what to do with the bear instead. From then on, it feels like the subservient chicken. You can tell him, for example, to dance with the bear:
Of course, many people tried other commands with the subservient chicken, so I had to try this, too:
Nice combination of stuff that has been seen before… Of course, you can share it on Facebook and Twitter…
Simon Sinek has written a book about a brilliant idea: „Start with why„. Now he has written a semi-good blogpost about the ad industry titled „I hate you: a tale about the advertising industry„. His main take out: agencies knowingly produce stuff people don’t want to see, so they look for ways to make people watch that stuff anyway. His proposal:
the ad industry should work to improve the quality of their product to a point where people want to watch it.
Well, isn’t that what creative agencies are trying to do anyway? It’s a problem of targeting. The best ad is wasted on someone who doesn’t care or even hate the brand. And once an ad is well targeted, it’s message should be relevant, and there should be no question about acceptance. A good creative targeted at the right audience should never fall into the trap of being annoying.
However, the world isn’t perfect, and in mass distributed media, there will always be a spillover – i.e. ads delivered to people who don’t care about the brand, the message, the offer. And it’s not only a question of entertainment, as Simon Sinek suggests:
The quality of advertising should always be measured based on how entertaining or engaging it is. They should stop measuring how many people are forced to watch (reach and frequency) and start measuring how many people choose to watch.
The main factor is not entertainment, it’s relevance. An ad can be highly successfull, if relevant, even if it’s not in the least entertaining. Given the right context, a fitting message and good targeting, you might also want to call advertising „information“.
Of course, if neither of that is true, you should call it „spam“ or simply annoyance.
The main point of Sinek is, however, that ad agencies produce their creative having a different target audience in mind: the client. For that matter, we might even add another target audience that sometimes play an important role: jurys of advertising award shows. Much of what is created serves to satisfy individual client needs, or may be even simply client internal political structures.
So Sinek argues, that ad agencies should instead again focus on their main target audience: the end customer.
Producing a product for the consumers who are the ones actually consuming the product makes more business sense, too. Clients would be able to spend less on media because the work would be more memorable. Plus, if people CHOOSE to watch the ads, they are more likely to like the brands, products and companies featured in those ads. In other words, if advertising was made for consumers and not clients the ultimate benefactor would actually be the client…and isn’t that supposed to be the job of good advertising?
Good idea. Given what I notice in the industry, this is definitely the intention when creating new ideas. Within the realm of highly user-centric media such as social media, this thinking has already started to sink in. It just needs to permeate all the layers of „integrated“ agencies, until even the most classically oriented teams are also familiar with this idea.
Wo ich sonst so bin...