Seemingly building a reputation within brainstorms for throwing out the term ‘Augmented Reality’ (AR) without much back up, I started to question if I fully understood the capabilities of this increasingly fashionable term.

Defined by Wikipedia as ‘a live direct or indirect view of a physical real-world environment whose elements are augmented by virtual computer-generated imagery’ I realised I was not really any the wiser.

Having experienced examples using a ‘magic symbol’ where one can hold up a piece of card in front of a webcam and before you know it, a space rocket is taking off in the palm of your hand;  JLS appear with an exclusive performance; or even a fashion show of models appear on the table before your very eyes (all on-screen, yet seemingly in front of you).

All a bit of fun plus added wow factor (as long as you have a webcam), however as I researched further, I found some interesting ways AR is increasingly becoming part of brand activity.

Hugo Boss livened up their Christmas window displays with a sales promotion through an interactive game to drive people in store.

Fashionista use AR to allow customers to ‘virtually try on clothes’.

A really fun example is by Yahoo, which was simple and engaging, and was installed during the Winter Olympics in Vancouver.  Through motion detection, passersby appeared on screen to be dressed in various accessories from hats and scarves, to sunglasses or rain hats.

AR is clearly developing fast. As a late adopter in many forms of technology I don’t own an iPhone – yet – however am curious around the AR capabilities it offers.  iPhone users can download various applications that use the phone’s camera and GPS capabilities to gather information about the surrounding area. Then information about pretty much anything programmed such as restaurants or bars, overlay on the phone’s screen. In the Netherlands you can even point the phone at a building, and the Layar application will tell you if any companies in that building are hiring, or it might be able to find photos of the building on Flickr or to locate its history on Wikipedia.

It is thought that soon we will be walking or driving down the street with augmented reality displays, which will be viewed through what, looks much like a normal pair of glasses, with informative graphics appearing in our field of view, and audio will coincide with whatever we see. These enhancements will be refreshed continually to reflect the movements of your head.

I continue to be intrigued by the merging of the physical and virtual world, and look forward to seeing how far this can go…and to buying myself an iPhone!

By Samantha Pillage on August 9th, 2010

Tags: Brand marketing, Branded content, Communications, Experiential marketing, Olympics, Vancouver 2010, YouTube

2 comments

By Tim Crow on June 9th, 2010

Tags: Default, Football, World Cup, YouTube

No comments

Life moves pretty fast. You don’t stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.

- Ferris Bueller

Sentiments borne of teenage frustration and a need for escape, rebellion and self-expression from the master of the ‘80s genre, the late great John Hughes. A simpler time, one might argue: the days before the web, wi-fi, information aggregation and real-time status updates live-streamed from a virtual community of billions.

Nowadays, information overload is well-documented, but to put things into context, it’s worth reviewing a snippet of the review of web use in 2009 from the legends at Pingdom.

So, in 2009:

- 90 trillion emails were sent…of which 81% were classified as spam (that’s 200 billion mails a day)
- A total of 234 billion websites were catalogued…with a further 47 million added last year
- There were 1.73 billion internet users worldwide…an 18% increase on 2008
- 126 million blogs were tracked by BlogPulse…with 84% of social network sites with more women than men
- Microblogs weighed in with a hefty 27.3 million tweets per day…although 57% of Twitter’s user base is in the US
- Facebook reached 350m users…50% of whom logged on every day
- 4 billion images were hosted on Flickr…however, 2.5 billion per month were uploaded to Facebook
- 1 billion videos were viewed per day on You Tube…with the average user watching 182 videos per month

And breathe.

In an age where the relentless pace of technological change means that many of us feel like we’re running to stand still, how do we find the time to stand and stare? If only there was some kind of machine that could take you back, pre-tipping point, or at least let you remember what things once looked and felt like…

You’ll be needing the Internet Archive Wayback Machine. Whether it’s for research, curiosity or simple nostalgia, this is a really fascinating resource. Type in whatever website you’re interested in and the site will offer you glimpses of archived pages from as far back as the mid ‘90s.

Just to get you started, how about:

Hotmail circa 1997

Google circa 1998

BBC.co.uk circa 2000

Sky Sport circa 2001

You Tube circa 2005

Granted, hardware, software and coding changes mean that not every page works perfectly or looks exactly as it used to. However, it’s a great way of frittering away a couple of minutes online, and even acts as a would-be stomach pump for the reclamation of forgotten morsels of data that Google, like a virtual sarlacc, has swallowed up but is now unable to regurgitate via organic search, such is the ceaseless growth of cyberspace.

Whether you find what you’re looking for or not, such online time travel confirms that LP Hartley knew what he was talking about…the past is a foreign country: they do things differently there.

By Jonathan Izzard on April 12th, 2010

Tags: Blogging, Content, Default, Facebook, Media, Online communities, YouTube, community

No comments

When people find out I work in sponsorship, I always get asked two things:

1. Do you have any decent tickets?
2. Do you have any decent gossip?

There was a time when I had plenty of the latter and little of the former. Unfortunately these days my gossip is about as revealing as a Tiger Woods press conference. The reasons for this are twofold due to changes that have happened over the last few years.

Firstly, the lines between sportsman and celebrity have blurred. Any star worth their salt should now be able to change their first name to ‘Brand’ and sound believable – think Brand Beckham, Brand Murray, Brand Schumacher. Could you ever imagine Brand Botham or Best?

The worlds of sport and entertainment celebrity, or ‘Sportainment’ as it’s naturally called in America, are now firmly linked and in more then a few cases by marriage (or separation). This means you become a front page story rather then a back page one, especially if it’s for the wrong reasons.

Secondly, and this is the significant recent change, with the rapid rise of digital and social media our appetite for instant news and our ability to create it has never been so strong.

Sports stars and clubs themselves are in on the act – basketball player, Shaquille O’Neal has a whopping 2.8 million twitter followers, while Barcelona FC has 1.3 million Facebook friends – but the real control lies with the person on the street.

After Tiger’s conference (streamed live on YouTube), we didn’t need to wait for the papers’ reaction the next day to gauge public opinion – in just the hour after there were over 93,000 tweets about it.

The headlines of Messrs Cole, Terry and Woods show us that the sports stars haven’t really changed – in fact the only surprise is that Tiger kept it quiet so long. The change is that now they are considered fair game by both a salivating media and an unforgiving public able to influence and drive the agenda. This means there few secrets that don’t come out eventually – or in other words not a good time to be straying from home.

Oh and before you ask – no I don’t have any tickets to the World Cup, Wimbledon or The FA Cup Final. No change there then.

By Dominic Curran on March 2nd, 2010

Tags: Andy Murray, David Beckham, FA Cup, Facebook, Public relations, Sponsorship, Tiger Woods, YouTube

No comments

Whilst browsing Twitter last night, I came across an interesting survey, via @mediaguardian, on journalists’ treatment of social media as a source. The US survey conducted by Cision and The George Washington University is based on responses from 371 journalists, almost half of which have spent over 20 years working in the industry. It reports that 56% of reporters and editors believe social media is important for reporting and producing their stories and cites blogs as the major source with networking sites like Twitter and Facebook in second place.

The inclusion of user generated content, from YouTube, to substantiate media reports has become an established practice – highlighted so evidently through the use of bystanders’ videos of the police assault on Ian Tomlinson during the G20 protest. However, the use of information taken from other social media sites seems to be moving things forward a stage.

Predictably, of the journalists that acknowledged using social media as a source, the vast majority (84%) admitted that they treat the information taken from these sites as more cautious and less reliable than traditional media. Whilst on first reading that might seem sensible, surely this depends on the context in which they are planning to use the information taken from the ‘source’.

I’m not sure that anyone that regularly contributes to blogs or social networking sites would propose that their daily tweets and posts be considered as ‘fact’. In contrast, I would suggest that the purpose of consulting social media should be to add colour to a report by drawing on different people’s opinions to shed light on any given subject, rather than providing the ‘facts’ themselves.

From my own experience in PR, I can happily admit to being a source for a journalist on more than one occasion via Twitter. From a combination of my own posts about the projects I’m working on and following a number of relevant journalists, I’ve managed to set up a number of stories in press. Rather than the content of posts being used as content, they instead highlighted a common interest and shared goal which made me the source. Certainly from my world, social media is becoming an increasingly effective and common way of communicating with journalists.

My advice to the 46% of journalists that don’t consider social media to be important in their line of work would be to give it a go. It won’t tread on the toes of your reliable, traditional sources, but it might just provide you with access to additional resources, colour and opinion than the ‘facts’ on their own could offer.

By Kelly Russell on February 16th, 2010

Tags: Blogging, Public relations, Social Media, YouTube

1 comment

Isn’t it always the way: you wait a lifetime to see a film in 3D about a hero named Bolt, and then two come along in a matter of months. Granted one was the John Travolta-voiced Disney blockbuster, whilst the other was footage of the all-conquering Olympian Usain Bolt smashing another world record at the Bupa Great City Games in Manchester this year. But it begs the question of just how many befuddled 6 year-olds out there thought they were off to see their favourite animated canine star, only for an altogether different eponymous hero to come bursting through the cinema screen.

In fact, this raises an interesting topic for the cinema-going public in 2009: how many more 3D films are we going to be expected to see? Bolt (both cute dog and sprint God) seemed to work; similarly Monsters vs Aliens made use of the third dimension, albeit, according to fans, slightly less successfully. Then Coraline, the new animation from Henry Selick, whilst a critically-acclaimed film, gains little more than a bit of textural richness with the addition of 3D specs. And don’t even get me started on Jonas Brothers: The 3D Concert Experience…

Are we seriously heading for Scorsese in 3D? Would a ‘remastered’ Withnail and I really offer a better experience if the audience felt every drunken lurch from Richard E Grant? And just how many geological eras will have to pass before Terence Malick gets round to pulling out the third dimensional stops?

With the advent of Avatar, James Cameron’s CGI magnum opus – widely tipped to be the most expensive film ever made – we might see a big screen production to truly make use of that extra ‘D’, though I guess the point is just because we can go beyond 2D, doesn’t mean we always have to – it should be something that feels worthwhile and relevant.

However, this is where the mighty cinema industry might disagree with me.

From the early 1980s, when VHS emerged victorious from the home video format wars, film piracy had become a reality for the major studios. Then the ‘90s brought DVD, and with it the potential for lossless data duplication. Coupled with faster, cheaper PCs, offering massive, inexpensive data storage, the widespread availability of DVD authoring software and the geometric growth of both the internet and home broadband capabilities – not to mention that feller in my local with the carrier bag full of iffy films – the piracy situation begins to look understandably grim.

Star Wars Episode III, Casino Royale, The Hulk, and most recently X-Men Origins: Wolverine – every one a $100+ million production – have all been circulated online prior to their official release. And once a film is in the public domain, things only get worse. With a host of questionable websites allowing web users free access to streamed (though largely crackling, jerky and unwatchable) movies, Hollywood needs a solution. Reading between the lines the studios’ answer seems to be to fight tech with tech: if you can’t pirate a ‘3D experience’, then you’ll have to go to the cinema, won’t you?

Well, according to at least one well-informed, well-respected (not to mention well-coiffed) critic – no. Mark Kermode’s POV – worth watching just for the clip of the unfinished cut of Wolverine that surfaced online – revolves around the question of the changing landscape of film.

In short, cinema might be the medium of choice for the all-encapsulating visceral movie experience, but the internet has offered a genuine alternative in the home – what the film industry needs to do is offer its wares to the right people, at the right time, crucially, in the right place. Oh, and stop green-lighting Alien vs Predator spin-offs.

By Jonathan Izzard on June 1st, 2009

Tags: Blogging, Default, Film, Media, The Arts, YouTube

No comments

So the Sony Radio Academy Awards 2009 – or ‘the Oscars of the radio world’, as I’m sure anyone involved will customarily term them – are almost upon us (tonight, to be precise) and the various shortlists make pretty interesting reading.

Yes, you’ve got the obligatory nods to Moyles, Mayo, Mills and Feltz (okay, maybe Vanessa was slightly less obligatory), but of greater note are the nominees from less readily available radio sources. No doubt this has something to do with the evolving face of media consumption: more DAB radios, greater penetration of satellite TV, the proliferation of the podcast, and – oh yeah – that internet thingy; but you’ve got to consider the content of individual shows themselves. 

For example, Answer Me This! – a weekly podcast delivered by Helen Zaltzman and Olly Mann has been shortlisted in the Internet Programme category – making it the first independently-produced comedy podcast ever to have been nominated. And certainly the first to be broadcast from a living room in Crystal Palace.

Check it out here.

Another potential surprise is the four separate nods amassed by Electric Radio Brixton, a digital station launched a couple of years back with live performances from Mick Jones and Billy Bragg. What’s so impressive about that? It’s developed, produced and run by inmates of HMP Brixton. Insert your own “the jailhouse rocks” joke here.

Whilst clearly an arena for more niche music, editorial and entertainment programming, digital radio and podcasts arguably provide a forum for creativity and expression beyond the traditional 88.7-108Mhz FM spectrum.

It’s no massive surprise to me, therefore, that BBC 6 Music’s Adam and Joe have amassed four separate Sony nominations this year. If you don’t know of Adam and Joe, or haven’t encountered any of their previous TV or radio material, I can only urge you: get involved. The three hour show – and its commercial music-free, leaner, podcasted offspring – is a subculture gem. Cleverly disguised as two good mates chatting about films, music, telly and whatever else takes their fancy, the pair are relentlessly self-effacing, witty and eloquent, putting in a unparalleled amount of personal creativity into every weekly installment. 

This has clearly rubbed off on their audience. One of the most popular features, Song Wars, where the pair write and perform songs based on a given theme, spawned Video Wars, a listener challenge to create a video to accompany said tunes.

One rather dedicated listener made an astounding homage to Radiohead’s brilliant ‘No Surprises’ video, to incongruously accompany ‘Meatballs’, a poignant Joe-penned number based on the cooking instructions found on the Ikea delicacy (seriously). 

If you don’t know the original video, click here to see it.

And this is the Video Wars version (NB unless you don’t mind getting a few strange looks, you might want to hook up your headphones before starting the clip below…):

A frightening amount of effort.

Still, the overall winner went a step further, creating an entire stop-motion film for Adam’s song, ‘Jane’s Brain’ – a ludicrously accomplished effort, the output certainly justifying A&J’s nominations in Sony’s Best Competition and Listener Participation categories:

I heartily hope the boys manage to sweep the boards at the ceremony tonight; although I’m doubtful they’d argue with any of the lags on B-Wing should Electric Radio Brixton manage to steal their thunder…

By Jonathan Izzard on May 11th, 2009

Tags: Default, Media, Radio, Social Media, YouTube

1 comment

I’ve been in plenty of creative meetings recently. Creative sessions to me are brilliant: lots of enthusiasm, energy, ideas and the best thing is you can’t be wrong (often!)  One of my favourite things is how fresh and innovative they can be. However, in the last year or so, one thing always seems to come up; flash mobbing. Now I’m not opposed to it – quite the opposite if you see below - but I don’t think it works for every brand.

Hats off to T-Mobile who reignited the trend once again at Christmas.  I’m sure you’ll have read about it and seen the ad but if not take a look below:

A quite brilliant intro to the use of flash mobbing, I’m sure you’ll agree.  Now for my new favourite, one I’ve just been sent today.  This is from NY400, an initiative set up to celebrate 400 years of friendship between the Netherlands and the USA.  If you’re in a hurry skip the first 30 seconds, but well worth a watch.

Not right for everyone maybe, but definitely right for some brands and this one certainly got me thinking about going Dutch.  So next time we have a creative meeting and the ‘flash mob’ gem pops up we’ll be giving it some thought. This piece demonstrates beautifully that you can still be innovative with a concept that’s been used time and time again.

By Ben Wilkinson on April 7th, 2009

Tags: Advertising, Brand marketing, Branded content, Digital marketing, Experiential marketing, Flash mobbing, Media, Music, Television, Viral Marketing, YouTube

No comments

At Synergy, while we work exclusively on the brand and sponsor-side of the industry, we still frequently receive unsolicited requests for sponsorship from hopeful individuals looking for funding to achieve their goals. One such enthusiastic sponsor-seeking individual caught my eye last week, fielding a rather unusual campaign.

Last October world pole-vault silver medallist Romain Mesnil suffered a disappointing withdrawal of sponsorship from his backer, Nike. In an attempt to gain awareness for his sponsorship proposal, the Frenchman stripped off, and jogged through Paris with, er, pole in hand, and posted the final video on his personal website. In one afternoon, Mesnil had whipped up nearly 300,000 views.

Viral heaven. Within hours the video clip, hosted on YouTube, had gone global. Media outlets and news wires all over Europe could not get enough of the naked French athlete who was prepared to do whatever it took to make potential sponsors sit up and take note. Well, they certainly couldn’t doubt his genuine enthusiasm and dedication, nor his athletic prowess.

Mesnil followed up the stunt a couple of days later with a slightly less controversial approach by launching a ten-day attempt to get sponsors via the French version of the eBay online auction website. After the buzz that his naked jog created throughout the industry and the media, he told a French news conference that he planned to offer sponsorship deals of himself through the online auction site to the highest bidder. Those who click onto his website can place a bid to sponsor the athlete with any profits going to a brain tumour research group.

A rather novel approach to rights fee negotiation, but hats off to him for fully embracing Sponsorship 2.0 in order to achieve, well, ultimate exposure.

In recent weeks, Mesnil has also sported a black kit with a big white question mark where the sponsor’s logo would normally be. When asked about his whole campaign by the press, Mesnil’s response was remarkably astute:

‘In times of crisis, you have to come up with a novel approach.’

How particularly relevant to the current times, and how very, very true.

By Lucie Bartlett on April 6th, 2009

Tags: Athletics, Public relations, Social Media, Sponsorship, Viral Marketing, YouTube

No comments

Back in February, Evan Davis and the Today programme team challenged viral marketing agency Rubber Republic to make a viral campaign to test the concept of viral marketing. Inspired by a number of successful brand virals (including Cadbury’s Dancing Eyebrows advertisement that did the rounds not long ago), the Today programme is running an experiment to see if Rubber Republic can make Evan, Jon, Jim and the whole gang go viral.

The final result went live on YouTube today:

On its own merits, it’s a fun little clip and worth a watch – especially for regular listeners who are familiar with all the personalities involved. Having picked it up from Twitter this morning, I sent it straight around the office, and on to friends and family who I knew would appreciate it. So, I guess in that sense, it is a good viral.

However, measuring its success as a stand alone viral will be tricky. For starters, they announced that it had gone live on this morning’s programme, which makes it impossible to discern whether any subsequent YouTube views are a result of that broadcast, or of having been passed the link virally.

Evan Davis suggested that Today would herald the project a success once the clip found its way back to the Today show’s inbox – but when you broadcast this live on air, how can such communication truly be the result of viral marketing, and not just fans of the show wanting to be the first to send the link back to Today?

Which points to another difficulty in measuring the project’s success: how many people sent on the clip for its genuine viral qualities (funny, worth sharing etc.), and how many forwarded it simply to be part of the experiment or, for those in the marketing industry, to share with colleagues the latest example of viral marketing?

In other words, by overtly referencing the fact that their viral content is part of a viral marketing experiment, have Today and Rubber Republic rendered the viral quality of that content obsolete? Hence making it impossible to measure its effect?

But then again, does any of this actually matter? Surely the whole point of the exercise was to get Today talked about, and to potentially reach a new audience of more social-media-savvy (and therefore potentially younger) listeners by engaging with blogs, Twitter and YouTube to convey a slice of Today humour.

Ultimately, my main question would be: has this engaged anyone who didn’t previously listen to the show? Would anyone unfamiliar with Today’s personalities actually see the humour in the clip, or see any relevance to make it worthy of sending to their like-minded friends?

I’m not convinced.

By Lucie Bartlett on March 11th, 2009

Tags: Radio, Social Media, Viral Marketing, YouTube

1 comment