Watching larger companies experiment with social media allows us to explore what can/might/and doesn’t work while someone else foots the bill and/or throws whole marketing teams at the effort.
Sony is a big company experimenting with social media campaigns. Some good. Some… well, doesn’t quite make sense (maybe I'm not the... intended audience? But, then, who IS?).
I’ve been watching two projects that contrast well against one another largely because the premise behind each campaign is strong, but execution diverges in that way that makes a great list of “do this” vs. “this could be done better”. Because each is fairly long, I’m going to do this in two parts. Sony: Do More of This vs. Sony: This Could Be Done Better.
FIRST:
This has worked well for some (i.e. Swiffer), but more often than not, the campaign confuses social media and running a contest. They are two different things. To make a contest work, you need some seriously compelling reasons for people to participate… especially once they realize that creating content is hard work. Thus, the prizes need to be both appealing and significant. (Though not a specific prize, momentary fame is also a motivator.)
To the participant here, the prizes include:
Aside: I need to mention that contests also require significant promotion to the right audience. YouTube, Facebook, and other social media platforms aren’t magical. It is RARE that something takes off on its own. But Sony is a HUGE advertiser and Pulitzer an organization that communicates directly to journalists (aspiring and not). Let’s assume they have that part figured out. (I originally found the Project.Report page because of an ad that ran next to a YouTube video on my own page.)
The contrast would be having a product name shouted at us over and over again… as entrants attempt to do it in the most creative way. Which annoys us with how contrived the whole contest is.
Here, we appreciate our program’s sponsors, as they made this all possible.
It also means the videos will have longevity and reach beyond the initial splash of the competition. Viewers will share these compelling stories via email, Facebook, Twitter, and other platforms. The videos themselves will rotate on YouTube probably for years to come. Each viewing will gently remind us of our sponsors’ benevolence.
The one downside I found on the Project.Report page was that the comments were loaded with deleted spam attempts. However, that’s always a challenge for a high-viewed page and it can be quite a challenge to manage those on YouTube. So, minor fault.
BTW, be sure to check the popularity ranking and viewer count numbers in the left hand column.
Sony: Do More of This - Project Report
Premise: “In partnership with the Pulitzer Center, YouTube presents Project: Report, a journalism contest (made possible by Sony VAIO & Intel) intended for non-professional, aspiring journalists to tell stories that might not otherwise be told.”
Launched in 2008, this not-quite-a-contest invites aspiring journalists/documentarians to produce a 3-minute piece that...
Document[s] a single day in the life of a compelling person that you think the world should know about and showcase how that person is making a positive impact in his/her community. (Video Submission subject must be a person other than the Entrant) Please Note: All video footage must be shot, and take place, during the same 24 hour period.
Note how easy that was to understand. Took me less than a minute to find that paragraph in their rules.
What works:
FIRST:
I say not-quite-a-contest to differentiate it from the often first-attempt-at-social-media contest many companies launch in hopes that friends/followers/viewers will provide compelling content to fill their social media pages.
This has worked well for some (i.e. Swiffer), but more often than not, the campaign confuses social media and running a contest. They are two different things. To make a contest work, you need some seriously compelling reasons for people to participate… especially once they realize that creating content is hard work. Thus, the prizes need to be both appealing and significant. (Though not a specific prize, momentary fame is also a motivator.)
To the participant here, the prizes include:
- A $10K grants, Sony VIAO Laptops (Intel Inside!), SONY camcorders and a chance to work at/with the Pulitzer Center—one of the most respected organizations in journalism.
- An audience of thousands (even millions) to see your work. Which is also a portfolio piece.
- A chance to tell a story that really matters, but is not being told. (Big motivator in the journalism world.
Each of these are great motivators AND are completely in line with both the spirit of the contest and the aspects each sponsor wants to promote: Sony/Intel equipment for video. Pulitzer for excellence in journalism. To the point that it makes sense that the Sony/Intel logos come across as completely appropriate within the context of the contest page. Even the videos where finalists are showing off their new Sony VIAO computers and camcorders make sense.
Aside: I need to mention that contests also require significant promotion to the right audience. YouTube, Facebook, and other social media platforms aren’t magical. It is RARE that something takes off on its own. But Sony is a HUGE advertiser and Pulitzer an organization that communicates directly to journalists (aspiring and not). Let’s assume they have that part figured out. (I originally found the Project.Report page because of an ad that ran next to a YouTube video on my own page.)
SECOND:
The content users are creating as their entries is NOT built around Sony, Intel, or Pulitzer. It’s built around telling a compelling story about the participants own community. Thus, there’s a reason for viewers to view the videos. Not only will this be more likely to draw us in, it’s much more likely to get us to watch other entries. Each one introduces us to something new. Pulls heartstrings. Inspires us with the compassion in our fellow humans.
The contrast would be having a product name shouted at us over and over again… as entrants attempt to do it in the most creative way. Which annoys us with how contrived the whole contest is.
Here, we appreciate our program’s sponsors, as they made this all possible.
It also means the videos will have longevity and reach beyond the initial splash of the competition. Viewers will share these compelling stories via email, Facebook, Twitter, and other platforms. The videos themselves will rotate on YouTube probably for years to come. Each viewing will gently remind us of our sponsors’ benevolence.
THIRD:
It’s really easy to understand and access what is going on. It’s almost self explanatory. The videos grab your attention immediately… may likely be how you found the page. Sony even included several videos providing filming and editing tips for participants. Full entry rules are one click from the page. Most importantly: Videos are there to communicate WITH us, to draw us in. Even the one talking head (the main video on the page) is there to help us understand what is going on. Informing vs. talking AT us.
The one downside I found on the Project.Report page was that the comments were loaded with deleted spam attempts. However, that’s always a challenge for a high-viewed page and it can be quite a challenge to manage those on YouTube. So, minor fault.
BTW, be sure to check the popularity ranking and viewer count numbers in the left hand column.
On to part 2, Sony: This Could Be Done Better
Public relations geek, consultant, writer, speaker, social media explorer, surfer (the ocean kind), paraglider... maybe even some kind of artist.