03 Mar 2010

Virals – Always a good thing?

1 Comment Digital & Social Media

Viral is regarded as something of a swear word at PN Towers, and most people who have mentioned it in front of the digi team have been forced to join in the mantra of ‘viral is not a strategy, it’s a tactic’. We also have this handy sign pinned to the wall to remind people of our stance.

Viral

One of the reasons that we dislike the word viral so much is that making something viral is actually not that easy. There’s a lot of content out there, a mere 20 hours of content is uploaded very minute to YouTube, and that’s just on one video platform, albeit the biggest. Another thing to bear in mind that there is a myth around user-generated content going viral, have a quick peak at the the current top watched videos of all time on YouTube and you’ll see mainly music videos, some extracts from Britain’s Got talent and a a couple of videos that can truly only be described as WTF? Achieving cut through is often difficult, and normally expensive, which is why we were impressed when we first heard about the Sussex Safer Roads Partnership (SSRP) video which apparently had gone viral, with over two million views in a month.

YouTube Preview Image

A review of the case study on Direct Traffic Media claims that it has been showcased at TED in front of James Cameron and Bill Gates, and that there have been calls from around the world to have it shown on national TV in the USA, Brazil and others. So a roaring success all round?

A discussion on Twitter today with some social media peeps, including ex-PNers Mat Morrison and Brendan Cooper concluded with the thought that perhaps, while a very worthy campaign, Embrace Life, had been chasing the wrong goals. Turns out we were being overly cynical as this interview with Neil Hopkins, the communications manager for SSRP reveals, on Osocio.

Was it meant to be local campaign?

Originally, yes. The creative brief stated that we wanted the PSA to run at shows/events, on our website, in training sessions etc, all within Sussex.

This is because we are limited by our geo-political boundaries and can only really develop something for use within our own borders in order to justify the spend.  We were all aware that the campaign might grow and become something bigger, but had to concentrate on our local market initially.

Reassuringly, Hopkins also states that:

We will be evaluating Embrace Life locally through face-to-face surveys, online polls and questionnaires etc. In the future, we will be monitoring casualty statistics to see if there has been a decline in the number of people killed and seriously injured through not wearing a seat belt.

Which means SSRP is evaluating the success of its strategy and not of the tactic, something that’s easy to get carried away with – particularly when you have a very successful video. What’s also refreshing is the inclusion of offline elements to drive the campaign, which mainly took the form of graffiti and banners around Brighton. Again SSRP will be asking people how they came to know about the campaign, and gives one anecdotal account of the success of the offline tactics.

One person I spoke to had seen the first artworks created and visited the website (when the website just showed the logo and a countdown timer).  He then revisited the site later and saw the logo at the end of the PSA, which reawakened the recognition of the artworks.  He told me that he sees them everywhere now and they act as a reminder to the message of the campaign.

It also created great images for use by the traditional media, and obviously the story of how the video has gone global is quite news friendly too.

Tags: , ,
written by
The author didn‘t add any Information to his profile yet.
Related Posts

One Response to “Virals – Always a good thing?”

  1. Reply interacter says:

    Hiya – thanks for the article, makes very interesting reading!
    I’m glad that the distinction between the strategy and the tactic has been aired – it’s a very important one for me.
    Totally agree about ‘viral’ being somewhat of a dirty word. My feelings on the subject are that you need great content and execution if you’re trying for a viral ad. Other virals – such as ‘Charlie Bit My Finger’ lurk about because they tap into a human desire for something cute and funny; viewers make the value judgement that it’s worth spending minutes of their life engaging with the content.
    This is the key I think – content that ‘rewards’ the viewer’s time investment with something worthwhile. I feel that a lot of ads are created with the express intention of going viral, but forget that content and execution are what will raise them above the herd.
    Is it best, therefore, to make the best piece that you can, to the highest standards of quality and with the right message, without the express intention of making a ‘viral’. If the content is good enough, surely viewers will engage and forward it?
    Cheers
    Neil

Leave a Reply