I have problems with this campaign. As defined on their website, the "Unsubscribe" campaign is supposed to "...send out a clear message to the government that we will no longer tolerate the abuse of human rights in the name of 'the war on terror'. Most petitions ask you to sign up, we are asking to take your name off".



This short film is not powerful, it's boring. It feels commercial, artificial and composed. If you're going to show something that really happens in prison, don't say it's a performance, and shoot it to make it look believable, home-made and harsh. "This may offend viewers under 14". Heck - they've all seen James Bond naked on a chair getting his nuts whacked with a rope knot last summer. Next.

Next, I don't see how this effort "sends a clear message to the government". If there's anything, Teh Government is thinking "Oh, it's these people going at it again", with a sneer of discontempt hiding behind the kevlar of their indifference. This campaign is not sending a message to Teh Government, this campaign tries to be a people shocker. Again. I think we're thru with that -- we've seen it all. Unfortunately, we've become insensibilised.

While having little or no effect on Teh Governement, the campaign certainly succeeds in sending a clear message to people, though: spreading information can be a real hassle. I think they took every possibility of sharing things over the web, and made a website out of that. I think this is the first example I've ever seen where too much media came in the way of a good message.

And about the message: "unsubscribe"? Does Amnesty honestly think that the majority of us eats up the drivel that Teh Government feeds us with? Does Amnesty honestly think we're not informed and aware about what goes on? I know I wasn't "subscribed", for starters. And I truly don't see how "unsubscribing" or sharing my miscontentment with others will concretely help a political prisoner in the ultra-secret Alpha BaseX99 somewhere in the desert.

What I don't know is how Amnesty works. I see petitions, I see emails, I see photos of political prisoners and people suffering, I see a lot of turmoil and anger. But what mechanisms are behind the work that Amnesty is doing? How do they save people? Who's been saved? Is Amnesty something that actually works? Now *that* would be something I'd want to hear, and to share. Tell me how far can my actions go, tell me there is real potential in my participating. Tell me that my donations don't fall in the Black Hole of Funding, with extra No Reported Return On Investment on top. Because I don't know.

When does a Non-For-Profit Organization set simple, attainable goals for the public? Everything always seems *huge*, and there is always *so much to do*. Scary. The brilliant Kiva.org is the only organization I heard of that sets concrete, attainable goals and shows results. When does a Non-For-Profit Organization take the time to congratulate its supporters? I have yet to see the results of my giving or supporting. It's always "give-give-give, more-more-more".

Have they created Compulsive Humanitarian Capitalism?

When does a Non-For-Profit organization advertise the progress that has been done?Advertising is always about people-shocking strategies or kids with flies on their cheeks.

What Amnesty International needs to do is start a real conversation with us. About them. About their mechanics. And about the results that our supporting generate. Don't unsubscribe me, subscribe me.

|

Maybe I'm a little late on this one. But then again I've figured out most of you would want to have a nice, safe place to watch the new Nike viral, Rise Of The Hybrids.

"From the chaotic aftermath of a galactic impact an orders emerges unlike any other. An explosion of new forms never seen before. Suddenly, all combinations are possible; animals fuse with other animals. Plants fuse with minerals. Beings and objects fuse with earlier ancestors of themselves. This is the rise of the hybrids", reads the very Ed Wood-ian introductory text to NikeLab's Rise page.

Rise of the Hybrids is actually the merging of four of Nike's Air Max technologies (Air Max 90, 95, 97, and women's Footscape) to form the new Air Max 360. And I think I know the reason for this sudden "emerging" in hybridness (can I say that? Well I just did).

Now, I don't know about you all, but I'm well behind in Nikeology. I'm beginning to feel that all Nike's Air or Max or Moto or Skate or Blah shoe lines only resonate within the company, and not exactly within the consumers. Given, they have cool commercials. They have cool shoes. But when the common street athlete hits the store looking for a new pair of digs, Nike fails to be recognized as the perfect "sports" shoe: there are just too many types to choose from, they are just too flashy, and some other brand name shoe is probably better for such and such reason.

You don't know what to buy, and moreover, a store clerk will probably counsel you to buy Saucony or Adidas for your "specific" needs. Ouch, Nike, ouch. You lost your specificity. A basic marketing law: When you broaden a category too much, you lose your ability to be the "specialist" in that category. Thank you Al Ries.

Now I hope that this "hybrid" merge idea is something that's bound to bring a solution to that. I Nike's Rise is actually the rise of less variety, more specificity. If that's the case, I say it's the rise of a good idea.

|

Krazy good ambient media for Mothers Against Drunk Driving from agency Calder/Bateman, Edmonton. MADD has this history of excellent advertising, and these moms truly sound like awesome and daring clients. The stuff dreams (and less DUI charges) are made of. (Thanks, Ihaveanidea!)

|

There is a running debate in the ad industry (agencies and announcers alike) on whether ad agencies should allow the posting of ads that were initially made for TV only, on Internet sites. For example, yours truly, AdKrispies: I'm often posting TV ads of various announcers for your enjoyment, as (among other blogs of my type) I know the general public and agencies alike appreciate the artistic and communicational intelligences of these ads, and thus appreciate them being shared publicly.

But as I'm doing this, the following also happens:

- I become a new media channel for these ads. Let's say I'm displaying a recently-produced TV ad for a fictive company, Moca-Cola, then Moca-Cola gets some free advertising on a media channel they didn't pay for.

- This causes many media placement obligations to be infringed, among others this one: the agencies usually negociate actors appearing in ads depending on complex calculations, but basically withstanding reach (how many people see the ad) and frequency (how many times they see it). While you cannot control the internet posting of TV ads, there is no way to say how many additional times an ad will be seen, other than its original TV use. This means that the actors appearing in the ads you view on places like here are not being paid as per contract definition.

- The fact that Moca-Cola gets a free additional media channel means good news for their product placement and brand, yet somewhere, ad agencies lose money (oh I know, boo-hoo-hoo) for work they should normally be paid to do - media placement. But of course, they shut up because the client is happy.

So, as Moca-Cola's commercial is being featured on web sites, the following happens: instead of going even with their 1 million$ total placement/production costs on canadian TV...

- They now get maybe twice or three times much viewers than their originally intended TV viewership,
- They get viewed in countries they never expected to reach,
- They pay peanuts to the production house, actors and agencies for their now worldwide success,
- Are winning over incredible word-of-mouth for their new product/ad.

So this brings the interesting question(s):

Do you think viral video will eventually kill media placement in television?

As announcers, should we be happy that viral video is a phenomenon that actually helps propel our work forward, or should we find a way to control internet propagation to the keep cost/revenue ratio balanced?

Please post your opinions and comments freely. In any language you like.

|

As you may know, organic food is currently enjoying constant market growth, and is leading an ongoing fight against industrial foods, OGMs and all those evil by-products. I don't have any canadian numbers, but as for USA (From Wikipedia): "Organic food sales within the US have enjoyed 17 to 20 percent growth for the past few years while sales of conventional food - while still larger in size - have grown at only about 2 to 3 percent a year. This large growth is predicted to continue, and many companies are jumping into the market."

Freerange Studios, based in Washington, DC and Berkeley, CA, have decided to highlight the phenomenon by creating "Grocery Store Wars", a humourous indie short taking reference upon a certain sci-fi movie to expose the reality of the Dark Side of the Farm (industrial foods and OGMs), and how organic foods (the Light side) are the rebellion that will spare no effort to overthrow the Evil Empire. The movie is fun and clever - wait 'til you get to the appearance of "Dark Tater", it's a sure kill- and presents the whole organic issue in a smart and entertaining way. The movie was originally done for the Organic Trade Association.

Watch Grocery Store Wars, and join the rebellion!

|

Here's a cool tool that brings something fresh to the world of viral video (for a good month or two, at least ;-) - Personiva. Personiva allows for the creation of branded content that can be personalized by the viewer, for the viewer. For example you might upload a photo of you, Personiva integrates it inside a specially-made commercial, and you get to watch a TV ad featuring you.

Check out HP's "Make computer personal again" and experience it yourself.












From the Personiva web site: "Personiva technology - recognizes faces, composites video, delivers dynamic imaging, creates interactive web interfaces, personalizes mobile messaging, drives e-commerce, measurable and ready-to-go."

While the experience is certainly new, its current application doesn't strike me as something that will last (the Levi's example on their site wasn't all that impressive), but I salute the idea. I do hope they find a way to push this a lot further.

|

Discover Gnoosic and it will discover you. Simple as that. Input three bands or artists you like listening to, and Gnoosic will come up with suggestions you might like to buy. Some ore old, some are new, but most of them are things you probably will enjoy.

When you find a band you don't know, you can click "Discuss This Band" and see what other users think about it. Fun, easy to use, and will broaden your musical frontiers.

Gnoosic waits for you here.

|