One of the many things I love about social media is the way it enables us to re-imagine how we use old media. This year I’ve seen Nike do this brilliantly twice – first in Vancouver during the Olympics, and now in Johannesburg for the World Cup – using the same technique of integrating social media with giant outdoor spectacular ads to create ’socialised spectaculars’.

In Vancouver, as part of its ‘Force Fate’ campaign, Nike leveraged Canadian hockey fervour and its sponsorship of the Canadian hockey team, by inviting fans through Facebook to create their own inspirational ads featuring their favourite player , and then running giant projections of them onto the Sears Building on Robson Street in downtown Vancouver throughout the Olympics. Here are a couple of pictures I took of the executions.

They became a must-show for Canadian TV and a must-see, must-photograph and a  must-share for fans – Nike took pictures of the projections and sent them to the people who created them so that they could share with their friends.  Does it get any more social than that?

Four months later and 10,000 miles away in Johannesburg, Nike has repeated the trick at the World Cup as part of their ‘Write The Future’ campaign, but made it bigger in every way.

‘Write The Headline’ has global appeal by featuring Nike’s stable of football icons from around the world. The social media element is much broader too – fans can get involved through Twitter (#writethefuture), QQ (a Chinese chat programme) and Mxit (a South African IM app) as well as Facebook. And the ad is state-of-the-art – a dynamic LED installation that dominates the Southern Life building which towers over Johannesburg and can be seen for miles. Up to 100 headlines are selected each night and transformed into player animations, and when a fan’s message is used Nike sends them the animation.

Give it a try in the Write the Headline Facebook app, and check out the promo film.

By Tim Crow on June 24th, 2010

Tags: Advertising, Default, Digital marketing, Facebook, Football, Olympics, Vancouver 2010, Winter Olympics, World Cup

No comments

As the “Golden Generation” of England footballers bid for the umpteenth (and probably last) time to realise their potential at a major international tournament, fans across the country will be reaching for their Three Lions replica shirts, keeping their fingers crossed, and praying that “Wazza” really can Write The Future.

Back to the present. Before a fly-away Jabulani ball has been struck in earnest, the contest between “official sponsors” and those pesky ambushers has truly kicked off. The FA and Mars, an official partner of the England Team, are reportedly considering legal action against Nestlé, for “passing off” an association with the England team through Kit Kat’s “Fingers Crossed” campaign. Yes, this is the same Mars who undertook the infamous “Believe” ambush marketing campaign around the 2006 World Cup. For 2010, and the first football World Cup on African soil, a classic case of poacher turned gamekeeper.

Three questions, one for each lion on John Barnes’s Mars Bar :

1. Is Nestlé actually passing off an association with the England team?

This should probably be left to the lawyers, but from a layman’s / sport industry professional’s perspective, using Sol Campbell and Mansfield Town manager David Holdsworth as your “talent” is not the best way to infer an association with the England team. And despite the well observed allusions to England’s World Cup heritage – “cross your fingers for no penalties…no broken metatarsals…no tears” -and liberal use of the ambusher’s best friend (the St George’s flag), nothing suggests that Kit Kat sponsors Capello’s boys.

2. Should Mars be trying to protect their hard bought status as the England Team’s confectionary brand of choice?

A lesson for all official sponsors. Complain about the ambushers and you are giving their campaigns the oxygen of publicity. Mars clearly had good reason to turn gamekeeper and pay for the privilege of England partner status. They should be confident that their association, leveraged properly, will pay off. Otherwise, why not remain a poacher?

3. Whose current World Cup campaign is better?

No contest. Kit Kat have tapped into the very essence of the English sporting psyche, and the pervading sense of hope over expectation that grips every England football fan during international football tournaments. Their TV ad brings that insight to life in a down to earth, domestic football environment. Compare that with John Barnes re-hashing a song from 1990 in a sparsely populated park, with production values that suggest too much money in the FA’s coffers and not enough in the activation pot.

Reports suggest that Mars may have won the battle of the lawyers, and that Nestlé have agreed to curtail the campaign. Is that the final whistle on this contest? Probably not if Kit Kat’s PR team are on the ball. What price England players crossing their fingers during a crucial penalty shoot, or being caught on camera tucking into one of the 200 Kit Kat’s that have been delivered to the England training camp by the FA’s official supermarket …?

Whatever happens, fingers crossed that 2010 marks the end of John Barnes’s singing career.

By Tom Gladstone on June 11th, 2010

Tags: Advertising, Ambush campaign, Brand marketing, Communications, Content, Football, Football Sponsorship, Media, Public relations, Social Media, Sponsorship, Sport

1 comment

I do like a good April Fool’s Day story. As it turns out, so do my colleagues within Engine Towers.

Synergy’s Guinness spoof aftershave story that ran in this morning’s Metro was PR gold (I would say that…) but hats off to our advertising friends upstairs at WCRS who created BMW’s gem of an April Fool’s Day advert for today’s press.

Anything that can simultaneously get me excited about the General Election AND make me want to buy a new car is all good in my book.

Love it.

By Stephanie Branston on April 1st, 2010

Tags: Advertising, Public relations

No comments

If, like me, you were unable to keep your eyes open until 4am on Monday morning, you likely watched the highlights of this year’s Oscars online the following day. Unfortunately, for the advertisers that paid around the $1m-per-slot mark to gain a highly coveted slice of the limelight, this means you missed out on the commercial gaps.

However, the chances are far greater that you will have seen those brands who advertised in the Best Picture nominated movies. Fenton’s Creamery ice cream in Disney’s Up? BMW and Taco Bell in American Football drama The Blind Side? American Airlines, Hilton Hotels or Chrysler in Up In The Air? Ringing any bells?

It’s always quite amusing to survey friends and colleagues on their recollection of product placement on screen – the latter especially given that they work within marketing and are arguably more watchful of brand presence within entertainment platforms. If you mark this against the reality (superbly documented by Brand Channel’s Brand Cameo database), I have found that by and large people’s recall is probably less than 5% of the actual brands exposed on screen.

To make things interesting, those clever Brand Cameo folks have taken the brands present in this year’s Oscar contenders for Best Picture and plotted them on a matrix: pitching memorable versus instantly forgettable, against those that provided significant profit versus those that did not.

Hopefully, they won’t mind me reproducing it in full here:

(c) BrandChannel.com 2010

Now for the really interesting bit. Of those featuring in the most memorable segmentation, both Günther’s in District 9 and RDA that featured in Cameron’s epic Avatar were actually fictional brands.

Having written previously on how events, rights-holders and entertainment platforms are increasingly feeling the need to get a ‘brand stamp of approval’ on their project (even if they have to make one up), I am now more convinced than ever that we all now require a brand presence within our entertainment to validate its grounding in reality.

Though in the case of both District 9 and Avatar, paradoxically the branding was exercised to validate their grounding in un-reality. I guess given their sci-fi nature, it seems to make more sense to create a fictional unknown brand, thereby emphasizing the futuristic setting. But nonetheless, Günther’s and RDA still fall firmly on the ‘memorable’ side of scale – despite their non-existence in our reality.

Was this a missed opportunity for ‘real’ brands? Would South African-born Nando’s or thoroughly American N.A.S.A. have offered anything more? Would the producers have allowed it? Would the brand managers have wanted to association? And would the brand messages have been more – or less – memorable as a result?

I would love to know what goes in to thinking up these fictional companies. Do production execs or screenwriters work in a name that states a subtle (or not-so-subtle) socio-political message to fit with the film’s thematic development? As one District 9 viewer pointed out in a fan forum, sometimes the connotations have more meaning than at first it might appear:

‘Why were the South Africans patrons of a restaurant named Günther’s? Günther is the name of a king of Burgundy and means “warrior” or “soldier.” In effect, the South African blacks had a white warrior to thank for their sustenance.’

Either which way, we are entering an era where commercialism of movies – on and off screen – may fast become the life-blood of the industry; if, in fact we are not there already. How many years before an esteemed member of the Hollywood glitterati stands before the Academy audience and announces, ‘And the Academy Award for Best Product Placement goes to….‘?

Judging by the above, this year it should have gone to a brand that doesn’t even exist.

If this year’s Oscar-winning animated short film Logorama is anything to go by, it won’t be long. For those who have not yet had the pleasure of this little piece, the entire premise is the over-branded commercialisation of modern-day America on film. Watch the trailer below, and try to count the brand logos. There are over 2,500 in the full piece. Utter genius.

By Lucie Bartlett on March 9th, 2010

Tags: Advertising, American football, Brand marketing, Film, Product placement

No comments

Those little red mittens came to symbolise the 2010 Olympic Winter Games in Vancouver. At $10 a pair, with half going towards Canadian athletes (though I’m not sure by which specific route), they were the must-have item for those attending the Games.

As I left the Air Canada lounge for the flight back from Vancouver last week, I fell into step behind a group of passengers who were debating the success of the mittens and what London 2012 should produce that might perform a similarly symbolic role. One of them thought it a good idea to produce a specially commissioned football shirt. I thought at the time that this was a silly idea; on reflection I think it would be borderline catastrophic. Here’s why.

The mittens performed a number of roles, some obvious and others less so, but all of which were entirely relevant to the occasion: they kept your hands wrapped in fleecy warmth; they branded the Games as they featured in their deep red multitudes in TV coverage of every Olympic event; and they allowed viewers to show their appreciation and applause for competitors as they clapped their mitten-clad hands together or held them to the sky.

I’m led to believe that the mitten is also a traditional Eskimo garment, which has positive cultural overtones relating to the native population; and they also supported a worthy cause, looked great and were priced accessibly.

Contrast these benefits with the message that a football shirt would send. It would reinforce (mostly) ill-founded foreign views of British sports fans as an ill-mannered rabble; its symbolic function is to divide us into tribes rather than unite us in support; it is unlikely to be cheap to buy; and it sure as hell won’t protect us from our weather.

I think the right souvenir garment – London’s version of Vancouver’s red mittens – is a stellar idea, but what should it be? Suggestions on a postcard please (or in the comment box below) as to what we might produce for London 2012.

By Scott Garrett on March 2nd, 2010

Tags: Advertising, Football, London 2012, London 2012 sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship, Olympics, Sales promotion, Vancouver 2010, Winter Olympics

1 comment

When I tell you that I’m a big fan of Chrome, relax, I’m not hinting that anyone get Westwood round to pimp my ride – I am rather referencing Google Chrome, the web browser launched in late 2008 by the ubiquitous internet behemoth.

Having used it as my default browser since downloading the programme over a year ago, I’ve since installed it on my home PC and laptop, as a welcome break from Internet Explorer. I realise that I’m not the first person to break convention here, with any Mac users out there, along with the more technologically savvy, already well aware of life after Microsoft when browsing the web, with Safari – Apple’s own browser – and Mozilla’s Firefox, the main contenders for IE’s crown in the years BC (that’s Before Chrome); however, December 2009 finally saw Google’s new window onto the web overtake Safari’s hard-won market share. No mean feat, a year after launch.

This leaves the stats from December 2009 looking something like:

1. Internet Explorer - 62.69%

2. Mozilla Firefox - 24.61%

3. Google Chrome - 4.63%

4. Safari - 4.46%

5. Opera - 2.93%

6. Netscape Navigator - 0.32%

7. Various others - 0.68%

(Source: Market Share)

This may not look too significant a shift, although given that this % represents around 40 million users, and that Internet Explorer’s global usage dropped by almost 7% last year (from 69.23% in Feb 2009), you might start to appreciate the long-term machinations of Messrs Page and Brin, and how these might impact on one William Henry Gates III in the war of the super-rich supernerds.

In quite a major move for the brand, Google has even been running an offline ad campaign publicising Chrome. Commuters at Oxford Circus may well be familiar with both the posters and digital escalator creatives drawing attention to the ‘fast, new browser, made for everyone’. Indeed, in the lead-up to Christmas, Google engaged in another rare piece of ATL, with a Metro wrap (you may have seen this repeated last week), as well as a call to action for people to make Chrome one of their Xmas gifts to a loved one, via the www.givechrome.com website. Well, it’s better than a pair of socks.

This activity certainly translated into curiosity amongst web users, with searches for Chrome overtaking Internet Explorer for the first time ever, which Google – or its media department – would doubtless argue contributed to its rise in the browser rankings that very month.

So, what’s good about the product? Well, it’s very clean, clear, fast and free; you can have lots of different web pages running at the same time with no drag, and if any particular page crashes, Chrome simply shuts down that tab, rather than the whole browser. I’d definitely recommend it, although the programme is still not a catch-all: certain Microsoft plug-ins are incompatible with Chrome (hmmmm, how unexpected), making it difficult to use some online applications such as the SkyPlayer. For everyday browsing of the internet, however, it’s fantastic.

Other than the slow burn process of accruing new advocates and users, what next for Google Chrome? The answer is actually slightly more ambitious than you might think, with Google now moving further into Microsoft’s back yard through the development of the Google Chrome OS (Operating System). Whilst it’s still a way off, with an official release scheduled for the latter half of 2010, the concept is remarkably different to the traditional Windows offering. As outlined by company chiefs at Google HQ in November last year, the OS is designed with a focus on three user requirements: ‘Speed…Simplicity…Security’, achieving its aims via a radical approach: to all intents and purposes, Google Chrome OS only works when you are online.

What the hell? So I’ve got to be online for my PC to work, you say? Well, sort of.

Although this may sound pretty restricting, Google are not setting themselves the challenge of beating Microsoft at its own game, but rather carving up a piece of the action for themselves, namely through appealing to the burgeoning netbook market. Sales of these small, light, web-friendly PCs were up 103% in 2009, and with decreased price points and increased wi-fi availability, this trend looks to continue. To date, the concept has received a mixed reaction: for the always-online professional netbookers out there, Google are preaching to the converted, with a promise of a system that will be ready to surf the web within seven seconds of power-up; plus they won’t need to store all their docs on their hard disc, with data instead stored remotely and accessed via the web. Google aren’t the first to use a ‘cloud’ system, but probably are the first to take the concept of virtual storage for mobile PC users to such a commercial extreme.

From starting life as the cleanest, fastest and most efficient way to find what you need on the internet, Google has, in an incredibly short space of time become part of our culture, our very vocabulary. And in today’s information age, there appears to be no stopping them: news, video, mail, maps, photos, phones, toolbars, Trends, translation, into China (and out again?) – and we search, and we search, and we search…

By Jonathan Izzard on January 19th, 2010

Tags: Advertising, Brand marketing, China, Digital marketing, Media

1 comment

Last weekend the Betfair team here at Synergy were involved in a world football first at Old Trafford for the Manchester United v Everton match. For the first time in football history, the faces of fans appeared on TV interview backdrops and LED ad boards, as part of Betfair’s unique Get Behind United campaign.

Fans were able to win this once in a lifetime opportunity by uploading their photo at www.betfairfootball.com/getbehindunited. Promotional girls were outside the ground at the previous Manchester United v Blackburn match to take fans’ photos which were also entered in to the competition.

Betfair’s USP is that fans bet against each other rather than against a bookmaker, and this was brought to life before the Everton match where the Synergy Experiential team organised a Betfair football roadshow where fans could take part in a variety of football skills challenges for the chance to win a signed United home shirt, as Event Magazine reported. The Fan v Fan messaging was also emphasised on-pitch at half-time by fans competing against each other in a skills challenge. Before kick-off there were once again promotional girls taking photos of fans’ faces ahead of the Manchester United v Aston Villa game on 12th December, where the activity will be repeated as Betfair again give back to United’s loyal supporters by offering them a unique experience for a worldwide audience to see.

The campaign has gone down incredibly well with the fans; I had a thank you email from one of the winners calling it an “unforgettable experience” and Duncan Laryeah. whose face appeared on both the perimeter boards and interview backdrop claimed “it was almost like there wasn’t a football match on that day!” If you’re a Manchester United fan go and upload your photo at www.betfairfootball.com/getbehindunited and be involved in a World Football Second.

By George Woffenden on November 27th, 2009

Tags: Advertising, Football, Manchester United, Sponsorship

No comments

I’ve just rushed to get the tube and I’ve amazed myself with how much access to information I need for my 20 minute trip home. I left the office frantically grabbing marketing press, to make sure I’m up to date with the ever changing marketing environment in which we live. On the way to the tube I picked up the (sadly only remaining) evening free sheet to stay in touch with London, sport and news. Not forgetting hastily refreshing my Twitter feed before I head to the depths of the underground to ensure I’ll be up to speed with all the goings on with my many new online buddies. They’ll be fixing the signal down here soon right?

All this for just 20 minutes? And in that time I’ll guess I’ve had 200 plus brands trying to talk to me.  The problem being (particular at this time of day) I don’t feel that up for a chat. I just want my facts and stats to keep me up to date. I don’t need info overload.

My short journey home provides a small example of the millions of channels available to me – but hopefully you see my point – engaging with your target can be more and more challenging each and every day. I recently heard someone with supreme intellect profess “It’s not the message, it’s the medium”. Wise words I thought. But, then two days later, I was at a fabulous talk when the online guru said “The channel is secondary, it’s all about the content”. Two quite different views and further weight to the challenge we face in the future of marketing.

All of this got me thinking. How would I engage with me if I was a brand? A quite simple task you’d think. I know the target audience reasonably well. I’ve got a good grip of what makes me tick and can tap in to the inner brain that is so important to both influencing behaviour and planning the most opportune moment for interaction.

I’m quite a simple being. I love sport, cooking, a bit of music, the odd drink and going on holiday is right up there. I want short and relevant bits of information and, if you can give me something with added humour or something of genuine interest I’m hooked. Simple.

Now, the challenging element is finding how to give me this gift of humorous/interesting content along with the brand’s message. How do we know what media I’ll be consuming, how much time I’ll have and what distractions I’ll have along my way? The truth is we don’t, but we do know I’m loyal to certain media platforms, albeit ones that change and fairly regularly too. At the moment I’m hooked on Twitter and I scan the free sheets on my way to and from work, so get your message to me there and I should get it (as long as it intrigues me). Through Twitter I might even respond and you’ve suddenly gone beyond just a message and I’m in dialogue with the brand.

Now if that message was to invite me to an experience or event that floats my boat, the brand’s on to something. By engaging me further with one of my passion points, I’m happy to interact but I won’t hit the dance floor on my own. I need to be invited.  As soon as I’m hooked, I’m loyal and I’m long-term – the perfect consumer. And for me, here lies the true power for the future of marketing; an integrated approach to communication leading to an immersed brand experience to drive powerful long-term consumer relationships. 

Partnerships between brands and content/experience platforms strengthen the opportunity and that is why sponsorship is increasingly becoming the core of many major marketing strategies.  I certainly see it as the future, but am keen to get some opinions; if you’ve read this far please feel free to leave your thoughts in the comments.

Now, all this thinking has made me miss my 20 minutes with the London Lite, Marketing Mag and Twitter. I’m also questioning the content I’ve just produced. I guess if no one reads it I could always blame the medium?

By Ben Wilkinson on September 29th, 2009

Tags: Advertising, Communications, Digital marketing, Experiential marketing, Sponsorship, Sport

2 comments

With the oustanding efforts of the England cricket team splashed across the media, Virgin Trains have boarded the bandwagon by given the Australians a fresh reminder of their loss with a touch of English humour.

This is not the first time that Virgin Trains have run ads featuring sports stars.  At the start of this year the company ran a  ‘Liverpool to London return faster than Robbie Keane” campaign.

By Simon Roche on August 26th, 2009

Tags: Advertising, Ashes, Cricket, Default

No comments

Bell’s whisky acted fast this week to leverage Ian Bell’s recall to the England cricket team. The Diageo-owned whisky brand announced its sponsorship of Ian Bell’s bat as he takes the stage in the third Ashes Test at his home ground in Edgbaston.

By Caroline Ayling on July 31st, 2009

Tags: Advertising, Alcohol, Ashes, Brand marketing, Cricket, Sponsorship, Sport

No comments