51st State interactive comic

51st State Interactive comic

Have a look at this wonderful, interactive campaign comic - 51st State - which serves as an index to all the info about the issue of Canada’s new ‘Made-in-the-USA’ copyright bill, C-61. The text is entirely is composed of quotes which link to the sources on 193 websites, blogs, films, papers and articles.

The C-61 proposal has the most support from Hollywood and the record companies, and has seemingly earned overwhelming condemnation from Canadian lawyers, professors, musicians, filmmakers, and consumers.

Go to the download page!

While I brought the subject up to show off the brilliant comic, the issue may be of interest to people in the United States, the EU, Japan, Switzerland, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, Canada and Mexico, as new, secret copyright laws are due to be adopted via the G8 as early as the summit in July 2008.

The proposed agreement - called ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement) brings copyright law (which is normally a matter for parliamentary debate) under the umbrella of trade agreements. This means corporate lobbyists and governments can come up with laws that suit their interests in secret.

A leaked document suggests ACTA is considering its own world police force (seriously, just like Team America!) who would be able to stop random people at customs in any of the participating countries and go through their laptop or iPod looking for material which may infringe copyright. Travellers are presumed guilty until proven innocent, and could be fined and have their devices destroyed if they don’t have proof of purchase.

Another important provision would give your broadband supplier immunity from prosecution in exchange for spying on you and providing the information to the media corporations without an warrant, should they suspect you are infringing copyright. I assume this means everyone is spied on and whether there are charges or not - Hey! look at all the valuable marketing data we inadvertently have. Let’s sell it!

It seems to me these laws are not so much about stopping commercial piracy, as they are about extending an increasingly archaic business model which is at odds with digital technology - nobody really needs record companies any more. Citizens, and their rights to expression and privacy, are merely the unfortunate collateral damage of this process, as are our institutions and the rest of the economy. It’s the revenge of old media on new media.

Coors: nothing is real

James Cherkoff on Modern Marketing blog makes some excellent points about authenticity on the web, discussing Coors new YouTube ads:

People find the social web attractive because it’s a very personal sphere where they can share the reality of their lives - without a key message in sight. And that spontaneous vitality is tough for even the best creative departments to fake. In other words, it’s difficult to craft ‘real’. But that hasn’t stopped some brands trying.

Read the rest of This Message Is Real

I love this kind of existential terror advertising. It seems very Philip K. Dick. No one is who you think they are, and nothing is as it seems.

It reminds me of the kind of marketing where you find out your conversations with friends about cool new gadgets were actually ads. I saw a documentary recently that looked at a UK buzz marketing company that had 7 year old children marketing toys to each other at school. They would work them into school projects. The children were paid in toys. Watch the clip.

Is the Coors ad a super high-realist, YouTube verite fiction that’s happy to be mistaken for the real? Or is it a kind of buzz marketing ‘happening’ where the friends-who-are-not-really-our-friends show up at the BBQ and act obnoxious?

James pinpoints the problem: “In traditional media you can get away with such fictional narrative. But on the social web it just looks contrived.”

But the marketing death spiral doesn’t end there. James’ example of the “imaginative riposte,” turns out to be yet another ad. Since you posted your article, James, the video makers have clarified that *they* were paid – and there’s nothing wrong with it. It’s just no budget, made-in-a-day internet advertising - which is their business. They say, “Stealth ads are lame.”

Similarly, at least one other response disproving the ad, “in an eccentric, quirky manner” was also paid for by Coors, according to Silicon Alley Insider. Ever get the feeling that consumers are obsolete?

It strikes me that the reason authenticity matters more on the internet is because internet media is conversational. In contrast, TV is monological. Fiction is common with monological media, like TV, movies, books, billboards, magazines, and so on. In contrast, consider fiction on the phone, by email, via instant messaging.

But it’s not so much a problem of fiction. The bigger problem is commercial brands can’t deal with the conversational media of the internet, as they quite simply have nothing to talk about. They can do monologs about products, but when it comes to conversation, they have nothing to contribute. So they either buy contributions, or fake them. And either way, it makes them look bad. People realize they have nothing to say.

Ironically perhaps, one kind of organization has lots to say: charities. They can talk about changing the world. Charities not only have something real to contribute, they give real people something to contribute to.

Kitchy war fantasies of love and youth

On Donor Power Blog, Jeff Brooks begins a discussion criticizing an MTV Burma ad.

Jeff writes,

“So in response to the tragedy in Burma, warplanes from around the world converge on Burma and drop flowers? We respond by blanketing the human-devoid landscape with sympathy blossoms? Excuse me, but could you go over that concept again? And what exactly is this intended to motivate people to think, feel, or do?”

In response, Terre suggested,

“This video is meant to stimulate curiosity and emotion, particularly in young people (it’s MTV, after all).”

“Those of us who’ve been in the business awhile need to be careful our thinking doesn’t become arthritic.”

I’m not sure age has anything to do with the criticism.

I find it an odd spot because it’s basically a branding ad for a feeling; a feeling about Burma that has little to do with the Burmese and everything to do with us. I find the ad very kitchy - like a non-satirical version of Team America, directed by Tim Burton.

Looking for some way to measure the ad, I compared it to a Burma relief video from Avaaz.


Go to the campaign page.

The videos compared:

Avaaz - young media (internet, DIY, YouTube)
MTV - old media (broadcast TV, big and glossy corporate media machine)

Avaaz - very DRTV (can you get more direct response?)
MTV - brand ad (’drive traffic’ to web site for more info)

Avaaz - a million euros raised (so far)
MTV -  a million euros spent (on the ad)

Avaaz - concrete politics (help the monks help the people; how I act matters)
MTV - confused politics (can’t send aid, don’t try; weapons are always the answer; how I feeeel matters)

Avaaz - Burmese speak for themselves
MTV - Burmese don’t exist

Avaaz - reality
MTV - fantasy

I would counter that the MTV Burma ad may appeal to a younger demographic - given the options of having a brand ad or a brand ad - but the overall approach is very olde worlde, corporate and the result of arthritic marketing ideas.

That skims the surface. I hesitate to mention the problem with the heroic fighter jets and ‘cluster bombs’ - in a week in which a long awaited US government report stated that the current administration lied to get support for a war of aggression against Iraq - as it would offend our fragile sense of history and political reality.

Think peace talks, not war

In Think Pebbles, Not Boulders, James Cherkoff talks about how the traditional campaign mentality of making a big splash is at odds with the networked media space, which is about making lots of small splashes over time.

I believe the (even) bigger challenge for commercial brands and conversational marketing is this: they have nothing to talk about. Fizzy sugar water. Household cleanser. Tastes great. Less filling.

I come from the charity world, which makes this obvious. Charities have something to talk about: changing the world. And it’s a conversation that can go on indefinitely.

Unfortunately, charities have traditionally followed in the footsteps of commercial brands. I’d like to convince charities that their natural affinity for internet media makes them the new leaders.

Think peace talks, not wars.

(I invoke the militaristic language of traditional marketing ;-)

Using video to speak directly to donors

Stills from Avaaz campaign videos I’ve been really impressed with Avaaz’s use of video in recent campaigns. Hopefully with this post I can give you a good sense of how they are using it, and also encourage you to add your voice to one urgent campaign.

By way of introduction, Avaaz is an international charity that works to “ensure that the views and values of the world’s people inform global decision-making.” The Avaaz Campaigns page will give you a sense of the work they do.

Much of Avaaz’s work is underpinned by online petitions via their web site. Avaaz supporters are notified of new petitions by email or mobile alerts. Recently, many of the petion pages for the campaigns include a video.

    Typically, the video is:

  • a message from someone on the ground
  • from a representative of the people affected
  • the representative speaks directly to the camera
  • it is typically a ‘quick & dirrty’ production with the bare minimum of titles and graphics
  • everything about the video production speaks to the urgency of the cause

In essence, rather than speaking for the subject of a campaign, the subjects speak for themselves. Can there be a more direct appeal?

I’ve appended part of an email I was sent this morning to give you a sense of how it works. Click the link at the bottom to go to the campaign page and watch the video. It’s urgent. We need another half a million voices by Wednesday morning. Please add yours.

EMAIL:

The world food crisis is skyrocketing – steadily rising prices are squeezing billions and triggering food riots from Bangladesh to South Africa. Aid agencies say 100 million people are facing starvation.

In response, the United Nations is convening an emergency summit of world leaders in Rome this week. There is a real danger that rich country leaders will push half measures and band-aid solutions – we need a huge global outcry to demand rapid, massive, coordinated action.

The head of the UN, Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon, will receive our petition at the summit at 9:30AM on Wednesday morning. This is a huge opportunity for our voice to reach our leaders directly, but we need half a million voices in the next 60 hours.

Click below to sign the petition, and then tell your friends and family:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/world_food_crisis/5.php?cl=94029425

Cognitive Surplus - Clay Shirky at Web 2.0 Expo SF 2008

Clay Shirky explores the idea that we could use the “cognitive surplus” time we wasted passively watching TV to change the world. We’ve had this time for decades, we just didn’t have the tools. Now we have the tools.

This is a great talk. It’s certainly worth 16.5 minutes of one’s time, and it’s an excellent explanation of the potential of the internet media for charities.

A full transcript is available.

Web users be getting ruthless

The BBC talks to usability guru Jakob Nielsen about current web trends.

Some key points, quoted:

Instead of dawdling on websites many users want simply to reach a site quickly, complete a task and leave. This makes them very resistant to highlighted promotions or other editorial choices that try to distract them.

“People want sites to get to the point, they have very little patience,” said Dr Nielsen. “I do not think sites appreciate that yet,” he added. “They still feel that their site is interesting and special and people will be happy about what they are throwing at them.”

Web users were also getting very frustrated with all the extras, such as widgets and applications, being added to sites to make them more friendly. Such extras are only serving to make pages take longer to load, said Dr Nielsen.

There has also been a big change in the way that people get to the places where they can complete pressing tasks, he said. In 2004, about 40% of people visited a homepage and then drilled down to where they wanted to go and 60% use a deep link that took them directly to a page or destination inside a site. In 2008, said Dr Nielsen, only 25% of people travel via a homepage. The rest search and get straight there.

BBC NEWS | Technology | Web users ‘getting more ruthless’

Test your donation landing pages

While email and web page copy may persuade people to “click to donate now,” less than half of those who click through to the donation page (and often just a few percent) typically complete the donation transaction.

From the Agitator:

…Nick Allen of DonorDigital shares some online research generated with Amnesty International.

The project tried to isolate variables that significantly improved the fundraising conversion effectiveness of website “donate” pages.

KEY FINDINGS:

  • Bigger donate buttons helped convert more donors.
  • Removing unnecessary fields from the personal information form significantly increased conversion to donate.
  • Reminding people (nicely) why they want to donate, was more effective than a more forceful call to action.
  • Using firmer language on the donation button (“Donate Now” instead of “Submit”) did not produce statistically higher conversions.

Read more…

Poor Louis Vuitton attacked by starving African child

A 26 year old artist named Nadia Plesner has been sued by Louis Vuitton for brand jacking their famous purses in a anti-genocide campaign.

The artist was trying to make a point that the media cares more for Paris Hilton extravaganza’s more than the genocide in the nation of Darfur.

Louis Vuitton gets Brand-Jacked, Collateral Damage in Anti-Genocide Campaign

We no longer have to be anywhere to do everything.

— Marshall McLuhan