Opinion | Features
- Nick Baker has shouldered the responsibility of marketing Australia as a holiday destination not just to the rest of the world, but to Aussies as well. As he finishes his seven year stint at Tourism Australia tomorrow, we give Credit Where it's Due to his efforts. Imagine coming into a new job as a marketer where the last campaign has just been described as a "rolled gold disaster" by the Prime Minister. This is what faced Nick Baker when he came into the big chair of chief marketing officer at Tourism Australia, inheriting the infamous 2006 'So Where the Bloody Hell Are You?' campaign that did more for Lara Bingle's career than Australia's image. [caption id="attachment_234590" align="aligncenter" width="468"] Nick Baker at Mumbrella 360, 2014.[/caption] However, in the course of his seven years at the helm of one of the country's largest and most closely scrutinised marketing organs, Baker has transitioned Brand Australia from brash and bogan to sophisticated and gourmet, yet still retained a sense of fun and identity. The 2010 extension of the incredibly successful Best Job in the World campaign from Tourism Queensland was a prime example of this evolution. An incredibly simple idea from then agency Cummins Nitro, creating a job of being a caretaker of Hamilton Island for six months, and opening it up to the world, had gained massive media exposure and a considerable bump in tourism for the Sunshine state. So the decision to create six dream jobs around the country garnered a similar huge response. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcCXPO68_CU And in 2011 when YouTube was looking for a place to bring together an orchestra of musicians from 33 countries who had never met before or played together, what better place to do it than Sydney Opera House. Of course supported by TA, and Baker. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnKJpYGCLsg Then of course there was the coup of bringing US chat show queen Oprah Winfrey Down Under, and her entire audience as well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6y5aeNxFcE An exercise then TA managing director Andrew McEvoy told a Mumbrella 360 audience had gained enormous exposure, including 140,000 Americans booking holidays to Oz on the back of it. And then there's the big brand campaigns. Music has featured heavily under Baker's watch, and in 2010 the world was introduced to the irritatingly catchy 'There's Nothing Like Australia' ditty. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpn6ijA8rrY In 2012 TA used the song 'It's like Love' set against sweeping landscapes of iconic Australian locations in a campaign from DDB which aimed to build on the 'There's Nothing Like Australia' work. The ad showcased examples of accommodation options and experiences and had a massive $250m marketing budget behind it. It was the first time TA debuted an ad in China. The most recent approach, which saw TA tap a new creative agency in the form of Clemenger BBDO Sydney, positions Australia as the destination for foodies. It continued the theme of sweeping landscapes but also aimed to convey the idea that Australia is the world’s greatest restaurant through showcasing the various food experiences available around the country from Uluru to the cities and the beach. While Baker's first year in the role was bumpy, with international visitors dropping in 2009 as the global financial crisis gripped the rest of the world, the numbers picked up substantially in 2010 according to the International Visitor Survey which runs from October to September 30, growing by 6 per cent to 5.381m, with 46 per cent of that number visiting on holiday. These numbers grew steadily over the years peaking last year at 6.3m, with the number of visitors arriving for a holiday increasing to 2.8m. Importantly trip spend increased 11 per cent to $12.3b. Millions of Aussies associated with the tourism industry will raise a toast to those stats. While we await with interest the next chapter in his journey, and to see the stamp Lisa Ronson will leave on the position, We'll lave the last words for this piece for Baker himself, who wrote in his leaving note: "Thank you all for your support and help, I wish you all the best in showing this country to the world, a country Greg Truman said ‘that is still a place where the reward for every breath is just a little more oxygen than you’re expecting’….. not unlike my time with TA." Credit Where it’s Due is all about generating positivity about our fantastic industry. While we welcome positive and constructive comments, anonymous or otherwise, this feature a snark-free zone so please bear that in mind when commenting.
- The Prime Minister might be prepared to shake off social media as 'electonic graffiti', but the traditional media impressions gained by the Taylor Swift Hottest 100 campaign tell a different story, argues Patrick Baume.
The P.M. again called social media ‘electronic graffiti’ over the weekend, after he faced extensive social and traditional media criticism over his decision to award Prince Philip an Australian knighthood, on the same day Triple J shot down the #Tay4Hottest100 campaign. So if both ends of the cultural spectrum are saying it’s ok to ‘ignore’ social media, there must be some truth there, right?
[caption id="attachment_272821" align="alignright" width="234"] The front page of this morning's Courier Mail summed up a lot of sentiment around the decision to knight Prince Philip[/caption]
Tony Abbott may have actually come up with a good metaphor for social media with his ‘electronic graffiti’ comment. Graffiti is loathed by some and loved by others, with most people relatively ambivalent, liking some but not all of it. Nevertheless, it undoubtedly changes the public space for everyone and its existence can create debate far beyond its original platform.
Social media is, of course, far more participatory than graffiti. Two-thirds of Australians have a Facebook account and millions of us are active on Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest and other post and comment platforms.
It takes a powerful act of tunnel vision for anyone who needs to appeal to a large audience to ignore what is undoubtedly a very mainstream method of communication in 2015. But is that what Triple J did? Or was their response based on a better understanding of how social media works, and how it interacts with other media?
It certainly appears that the Jays refusal of Tay was primarily because of the power of social media, not because it doesn’t matter, and because it was a chance for them to actively restate their cultural position while everyone was watching, not just on social media, but across traditional platforms as well.
We all know the professional journalist who seeded the Taylor Swift campaign (Buzzfeed's Mark DiStefano) got plenty of traction on Twitter, in fact from our Mediaportal tracking over 70,000 posts just in the last week.
Triple J has posted this to instagram. http://t.co/adZGnw63fu is real and the first reason is shown #Tay4Hottest100 pic.twitter.com/4fiffUDyEq — Mark Di Stefano (@MarkDiStef) January 26, 2015But it also achieved a TV cumulative audience of 13.8m across all three commercial networks and the ABC itself, a radio cumulative audience of over 3m including the top rating stations in five capitals, and a whopping print cumulative circulation of 46m including every metro masthead in Australia and plenty of regionals. [caption id="attachment_272895" align="aligncenter" width="468"] A chart showing media mentions to Twitter activity: Source, iSentia[/caption] You didn’t need to be anywhere near a tablet, smartphone or even your old fashioned PC to be fully aware of the campaign. Just like a talkback compere hoeing into some ‘appalling bit of public vandalism’ sprayed across a wall on Centre Street, you didn’t need to have been anywhere near the actual source to be aware of it and even to form an opinion on its merits. [caption id="attachment_272650" align="alignright" width="234"] Triple J's response took a swing at KFC's attempt to hijack the #tay4hottest100 hashtag[/caption] Ultimately Triple J received a massive amount of free publicity for the Hottest 100 across a vast array of professional media outlets reaching pretty much every community across Australia, and at the end of it all, it got to send out a warning that it was going to keep control of its own event, make fun of Buzzfeed and corporate sponsors that it doesn’t need and isn’t allowed to take, and restate that while it’s charter is to appeal to a young audience, it will choose what type of music it thinks young people should be listening to, thank you very much. You can certainly argue the merits of Triple J’s ultimate position, but you can’t argue that they didn’t know exactly what they were doing, and what the flow on effects might be. And meanwhile, for those who think they can put social media into a box as some strange little cabal of people ranting at each other with no connection to the rest of the universe, well they just need to smell the coffee and open their morning newspaper. Patrick Baume is group communications manager for media monitoring firm iSentia.
- TV networks are investing in new gadgets, camera angles and social media devices to keep viewers hooked on live sport. In this cross-posting from The Conversation Marc C-Scott of Victoria University looks at what's coming next.
Australia’s love of sport appears to be more from in front of a TV screen than actually attending any event live, and that could be on the increase given some of the new technology heading our way.
Samsung has confirmed that its new Sports Live app – on display at this year’s Consumer Electronic Show in the US – will be available in Australia later this year, but for which sport codes has still to be announced.
The app is part of its smart television range and provides on-screen information – over and above that normally provided onscreen by the host broadcaster – relative to the particular sporting event being viewed.
This helps the viewer as they can continue to watch the broadcast and not be distracted by sourcing any further game information from other devices, such as their smart phone or tablet device.
But how will new technologies, such as Samsung’s Sports Live, change the way we watch sport on television? This is particularly interesting in Australia where sport is a large part of our culture.
We love it live … on TV
Despite reports of poor crowds at games – and empty seats seen at many sporting events – Australia’s love for sport still remains, even if it is via watching it on TV screens. Sport broadcasts are among the highest rating programs in Australia.
The 2014 AFL and NRL grand finals were some of the largest television audiences for many years.
The AFL grand final was the most watched show on Australian television for 2014 while a week later the NRL grand final was the “highest-rating NRL game ever”, since the OzTam ratings began in 2001.
In addition to the television audience, Australia’s love of social media sees fans as one of the world’s most “prolific tweeters” when it comes to interacting with sport.
So why are we not attending the games more?
Arguably there are many factors, but one possible influence could be the increase and experimentation with broadcast technologies and techniques. Many of these attempt to add to the viewer’s on screen experience and bring the viewer closer to the action.
Cricket has seen many technologies introduced, one of the first was the addition of microphones near the stumps during the 1980s, followed quickly by stump-cam.
Since then we have seen the introduction of Snickometer (1999), Hawkeye (2002) and HotSpot (2006), along with spider-cam, which has recently come under scrutiny.
The most recent additions by the Nine Network to its cricket broadcast has been Viz Libero, a realistic 3D analysis system which allows 360 degree replays.
A similar technology, FreeD technology, is used in the US for the NFL and Major League baseball. While these technologies are currently controlled by the broadcaster, there is great possibilities if access is open to the viewing audience to control from their own devices.
The Ten Network has also added its own additions to cricket television broadcasts during the KFC T20 Big Bash League. During the game the network has fielding players wear microphones, while cameras are attached to the helmets and caps of both batsman and umpires for a point-of-view perspective of the action.
The Ten Network was also fundamental in bringing a point-of-view perspective into broadcasts of AFL games, when it introduced goal post cameras in 2010.
Later came the addition of cameras on goal umpire’s hats, which last year during one game was criticised by the AFL. These technologies, like many discussed previously, are intended to be two-fold, benefiting both the players and viewers.
Despite the initiatives for cricket and AFL broadcasts in Australia, tennis television broadcasts appear not to have yet added many of these broadcast technologies, other than HawkEye.
The new format, Fast4 tennis would have been ideal for the trial of new broadcast technologies. Particularly as it is seen as a competitor to cricket’s faster format Twenty20, which uses various additional broadcast technologies.
This lack of experimentation during Tennis TV broadcasts could be part of the viewers disappointment with the new “faster” format.
The FreeD technology has been used overseas for tennis, but despite the Nine Network using the similar technology (Viz Libero) for cricket broadcasts, it was not added for its Fast4 tennis broadcast.
Some technologies come and go
The 3D television broadcast of sport is one of the biggest new technologies to have been largely discontinued, despite the initial interest.
One US study reported by Nielsen in 2010 found 65% of respondents wanted to see sport broadcast in 3D, the most popular genre ahead of nature and animal programs (62%), and action and adventure (60%).
This was the same year that 3D broadcasts of sport began in Australia, with the Nine Network broadcasts of State of Origin (Rugby League), and Foxtel and SBS broadcasting soccer games in 3D.
The ratings for these broadcasts were not known, as OzTam did not capture the information due to the broadcasts being part of a trial.
At the time it was reported that 2,000 3D televisions had been sold. Since the 2010 trial, Nine also broadcast replays of the 2012 London Olympic Games. Network Ten had no plans to broadcast the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics in 3D “despite Olympic organisers committing to shooting it in 3D”.
Important to note that by this time ESPN, “the largest and most important source of 3DTV content”, had abandoned its dedicated 3D sports channel. Much of the dissatisfaction for viewers was having to wear the additional glasses.
Is wearable technology the future for sports broadcast?
The dissatisfaction for wearing additional technologies (3D glasses) raises interesting questions for the future of sports broadcasts, as 2015 is argued to be the year of wearable technologies.
In Australia, Foxtel has already experimented with wearable technology and sports broadcasts, with its Alert Shirt. Described by the developers, Wearable Experiments (We:eX), as:
[…] a fan jersey that uses wearable technology to take the experience into the physical world, allowing fans to feel what the players feel live as it happens during the game’.Not only can you watch the game, you can now feel it. Much simpler examples of wearable technologies and sport include Victoria Bitter’s Live Cricket Watch. Launched as part of the 2014/15 summer of cricket in Australia. The watch links to a smart phone and provides the user with game updates direct to the watch face. This year there will be some interesting developments, as wearable technologies become a more common part of our daily lives; as smart phones have. For sports television broadcasts there are many possibilities based on the technologies currently available. The addition of wearable technologies and the accessibility of technologies like FreeD technology to the viewing audience, will only amplify the viewing experience. The question yet to be answered though is whether this is what Australians want? Mark C-Scott is a lecturer in digital media at Victoria University. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
- Anyone who’s studied the theory of business or brands will be familiar with the concept; Brands must create or acquire attributes that let them outperform competitors for an extended period of time. Anyone who works in the reality of business or brands will know that this is a complete fallacy. A competitive advantage that lasts years or decades would require everything else to stand still. No changes in consumer behaviours or attitudes that reshape what’s considered ‘valuable’. No advancements in technology that ignite and obliterate entire categories overnight. No international competitors turning up in our streets, shopping centres or Google search results. No nimble start ups setting out to disrupt the industries we’ve worked so hard to stabilise. In short, no progress. So while the theory is appealing, the reality of creating a competitive advantage and then crossing it off the ‘to do’ list for the next decade is absurd. Instead, businesses must look for their ‘Transient Competitive Advantages’. Those things that give them a leg up for the next six, 12 or 18 months, after which it’s reasonable to assume that everything will have changed, and a new set of advantages must be brought to the table. Yes, it’s exhausting, but this is our new reality. It’s what underpins the new wave of startups who ‘move fast and break things’; Facebook adding Newsfeed, then going mobile first, then acquiring Instagram. Kogan launching with rock bottom prices, then being first to market with any new Apple or Samsung products, then adding 24,000 SKUs to over a dozen categories. But it’s not just startups, Transient Competitive Advantages also play a key part in the ongoing success of established players like Nike and McDonalds, who relentlessly reinvent their own products, processes and fields of play. For brands and businesses looking for a competitive advantage that will stand the test of time, there’s only one worth pursuing. Change. Self initiated, fast and often. Dan Monheit is director of strategy at Hardhat Digital
- Last year Cameron Upshall made a series of bold predictions on how the content marketing world in Australia would develop in 2014. Here he bemoans the lack of change. Australian brands had a fair old crack at content marketing in 2014. But unfortunately the market didn’t mature as fast as I thought it would in 12 months. This means the content marketing milestones I predicted we would reach by now are still a fair way off. Here’s a look back at the scenarios I forecast on Mumbrella this time last year, and my take on why the content marketing space just didn’t get its groove on like I thought it would. It’s strategy time I predicted that content marketers would take a break from the daily grind of content production and consider why exactly they’re doing what they’re doing. But they didn’t. Just 37 per cent of Australian content marketers have a documented strategy, according to research by the Content Marketing Institute released in late 2014. The reason a more strategic approach didn’t eventuate boils down to the fact that many marketers aren’t executing a content marketing program – they’re simply producing content for content’s sake. Even some of the country’s biggest content spenders still don’t actually understand what content marketing is. For example, a contact at an international brand recently confided in me that they’ve been active content producers for years, when in fact they haven’t. They don’t understand that content marketing is about a defined, long-term strategy and producing a highly relevant owned asset for a target audience (or audiences) on a regular basis. Don’t tell me that Facebook is the same thing as content marketing, because it isn’t. Amplification: The perfect storm I was expecting technology to end the ‘spray and pray’ tactics practised by so many content marketers. This would hopefully result in a refinement of amplification strategies and a big leap forward in the way brands promote and distribute content. Amplification did occur, of course, but not in the way I expected. We’re now amplifying content with the help of native advertising – a phenomenon that has taken off globally. The major shift has resulted in both the traditional and non-traditional digital publishers releasing native advertising products. Sponsored editorial offerings have been springing up on a daily basis, and while many publishers are grappling with how to actually deliver on these products, a significant opportunity exists for marketers to leverage other people’s audiences. An explosion of video content I thought content marketers would capitalise on video content in 2014 and embrace longer-form video storytelling. Instead, despite the endless research proving that engagement rates for videos are higher than static content, we’ve just seen more talking heads. Yawn. This lack of commitment partly comes down to high costs, as cheaper production alternatives failed to hit the market. We haven’t seen many pure-play video-content hubs emerge either. The dawn of data-driven content marketing We all know we shouldn’t commit marketing dollars to a concept until we’ve decided the objective of the endeavour. But that hasn’t stopped brands doing just that in the content marketing space. You’ve got to pity the poor marketers who are blindly trudging on without really knowing if their efforts have been worth it. If you don’t know how to measure your content marketing strategy, how can you leverage the data to improve it? Meanwhile, hats off to the truly savvy content marketers out there who have been keeping in tune with analytics and optimising their content accordingly. The year of the content-influenced platform I anticipated an explosion of new content marketing platforms hitting the market in 2014, and I wasn’t wrong. But while there has been a lot of progression in this space, the large-scale acquisition of these platforms I predicted just didn’t come to fruition. Sure, Oracle bought Compendium and there’s been some capital funding going into some of the platforms, but we haven’t seen any major software vendors embrace the content marketing platform. This is because they still haven’t figured out how to monetise it, unlike the savvy companies that have long been making profits with email software. Content, welcome to the boardroom The C-suite is the most critical and yet most difficult part of the content marketing puzzle. Established internal management structures that support traditional advertising models are the slowest to change their opinion on investing in a content strategy, as it’s very hard to disrupt the status quo. There are plenty of company leaders still scratching their heads at how content marketing could help them make sales, which quite frankly shocks me. Ultimately, until the big Aussie brands work out the opportunity they have before them and take content seriously, I believe we’re going to remain in a content marketing hype cycle. While, as I hope my article illustrates, there have been some monumental changes in the content marketing industry this year, I am saddened that many companies have failed to up their game. But while other brands are still trying to make up their minds about whether or not content is really for them, now is the time for you to make your own leap forward. Cameron Upshall is commercial director for King Content Melbourne
- The campaign to get a Taylor Swift song into the Triple J Hottest 100 has created a lot of column inches in recent days. Matt Saraceni argues the controversy is good for the station and how it should capitalise on #tay4hottest100 come Australia Day. If Taylor Swift places Number one in the Triple J Hottest 100 -- I will eat a hat. Any hat you care to name I will consume it. There is absolutely no way that will happen. I’d bet a nudie run on it. In fact I am. However, “Shake it Off” appearing in the countdown will be one of the best things to happen to Triple J and its audiences and everybody should be hoping it happens. Let me explain…. A lot has been made lately about Taylor Swift’s potential entry in Hottest 100. This is the largest democratically voted countdown that is traditionally broadcast on Australia Day to barbecues and pool parties all around the country. Because it is audience voted- what if the fan-base of one of the world’s biggest singers invaded the popularity contest and caused the unthinkable to happen. Disaster! And so, the questions have been rolling in: “Will she earn enough votes to get into the Hottest 100?" “If she does, should Triple J ever play Taylor Swift?” “How could the sanctity of the Hottest 100 be allowed to be violated by her?” [caption id="attachment_271959" align="alignright" width="234"] KFC's hijacking of the campaign has thrown Swift's eligibility into doubt[/caption] “Does *insert corporation here* being involved invalidate her entry?" Some people argue the divinity of the countdown – “you have everything else, please let real music have this”. Some argue the inevitable commercial crossover of previous Hottest 100 hits – Kings of Leon, Macklemore and Mumford and Sons all spring to mind. But everybody agrees that letting the pop princess place anywhere in the one hundred greatest songs of the last year is taking things to a whole new level entirely. Now, full disclosure, I worked for eight years in the hulking commercial beast that is Nova and loved and hated different parts of the playlist like anyone would. I too grew up listening to Adam and Wil in the morning and Merrick and Rosso in the afternoon so Triple J holds a very special place in forming my love of radio. In short, I adore Triple J. I have a lot of good friends who work and have worked very hard there. In the scheme of the radio industry, Triple J holds a very important place. It is a government broadcaster and is therefore not held to the ratings success of their “evil” commercial brothers and sisters. There is a reason Taylor Swift is played every 30 minutes on a different station- because, by a pure numbers game, people want to hear it. With the odd exception of Perth, commercial stations have to and want to out-rate Triple J. If Triple J was rating number one everywhere – you better believe Short, Fast, Loud would start appearing on night time radio across the country. But, it doesn’t. It is less listened to than most radio stations, and most would agree “maybe that’s a good thing”. I certainly do – where else will an Australian band get some airplay if it wasn’t for Triple J. 2Day doesn’t have time to break the next Powderfinger when Pitbull is racing up the charts. So yeah, thank fuck for the J’s. I think of all the many and great things that have come from that stations glorious 40 year history and I wouldn’t dare see it hurt. Taylor Swift placing in the Hottest 100 does not hurt Triple J at all. If the jangly pop drum beat eminates from the speakers (I predict somewhere between Number 10 and Number 20) it will be a big win for the station and another great moment in its history. Let me explain why… I have never seen so much chatter about the Hottest 100 in all my experienced years of the countdown. Even the fucking travesty of “Get Lucky” not appearing at #1 (one of the greatest songs of the last 25 years) which garnered some irate attention does not even come close to the amount of newspapers/blogs/Facebook posts that this controversy is attracting. Also, you’ve got to hand it to James Keogh – his ukelele number wasn’t that bad. Now everybody is talking about the Hottest 100 its role in music history, the responsibility and position of Triple J as a broadcaster and the “will they, won’t they” intrigue to rival a Big Brother promo. And mark my words, everybody will be listening on January 26 to see if and where that song places. Triple J being listened to by millions for many hours on end – what a dream! Finding a new audience to discover and maybe even love the world’s best radio station – superb! Showing the relevance of Triple J to create a movement in an increasingly digital age – amazing! Don’t forget there are 99 other songs that this new audience will hear, probably for the first time. If I’m a little known Newcastle band placing at number 82 – I’d love to think that a lot of people are hearing my song because I was lucky and skilful enough to have it appear in this countdown. For only three and a half minutes of air time given to a pop song – Triple J just won big. At worst it’s payback for all the times Triple J have attempted to prank the pop-tastic ARIA charts, at best it’s as harmless as the time Adam & Wil garnered enough support to get Salmon Hater in at Number 26. No matter what though, everybody got fired up about a little radio station. Triple J just proved how important it is to our culture and national identity. So what would I do if I was running Triple J? First of all, I’d do exactly what they’re doing right now. No comment. The only way to really know the answer is to listen to the countdown. Second of all, Triple J has some of the brightest, funniest and most talented young announcers and shows I’ve ever heard. Let them talk, poke fun and laugh about the circumstance. It’s what the station has always done best and people will laugh at their jokes because the whole situation is hilariously absurd. Third, play the song when it appears. Laugh, joke, even interrupt it. Fuck it, summon the best musicians to cover different parts of the song, assemble it in a montage and talk about how amazing Australian music is. Ask Taylor Swift to rap a verse in the middle about how great Triple J is. She’s pretty funny actually, she might do it. Who does this hurt? Nobody, everybody wins! Oh, except maybe the person or people who place at Number 101 in the countdown. I guess they lose. So play their song right after Taylor Swift, apologise to them and make them the hero of the day. Everybody will remember their moment in history too -- the day where a pop star entered the greatest countdown the country has ever known. Matt Saraceni is the head of content at Omny Personal Radio. This post was originally run on Saraceni's personal blog and has been republished with his permission.
- Yesterday streaming service Stan invited some members of the public to have a first look at the new platform. Mumbrella editor Alex Hayes looks at what it has to offer. Of all the streaming services being talked about at the moment (and yes there are a lot - Presto, Netflix, Quickflix etc.) the one that's most intrigued me is the joint offering from Nine Entertainment and Fairfax Media - Stan. So when I got the invite to have a preview of it which went out to the public yesterday, I leapt at it. However, my initial impressions were not good. I signed up on my work Mac, only to be told Stan isn't supported on Google Chrome on Macs, one of the bigger browsers. And when I tried to get it to load in Safari it loaded with glacial speed. Not a promising start. [caption id="attachment_271918" align="alignright" width="234"] (click to enlarge)[/caption] However, on my mobile devices (iPhone and iPad) - it was a different story. It's fair to say the platform has taken its cue from Netflix - and why wouldn't you? After all the US giant is the leader internationally in the space, so it's got to be doing something right. And if Stan wants to lure Aussies using the service away from it, then making it recognisably similar will help. The layout of the site seems fairly straightforward, and intuitive. When you log-in there's a feature carousel at the top plugging some of the top content, with other shows and movies sorted into genres underneath. It starts with what you last watched (intuitively), and the back catalogue of James Bond films which is some of its best exclusive content, scrolling down through new this week, premium drama and 'groundbreaking comedy' sections, down to pre school. [caption id="attachment_271917" align="alignright" width="234"] (click to enlarge)[/caption] I was surprised by the depth of the back catalogue, which features a lot of former Nine Network shows (as you'd expect) but also draws heavily on British and US shows like Sherlock, Ray Donovan, as well as Danish cop drama The Bridge. Shows like Fargo and its exclusive Amazon Prime content Mozart in the Jungle and Transparent are also well represented, as are a lot of classic comedies and a decent range of kids' shows. It is worth noting for long-running or ongoing shows, often only the first few series are available on the service. The recommendation engine also seems capable - throwing up a good range of viewing options similar to the show you're browsing - useful with what's a fairly extensive catalogue of shows. Having only had it for 24 hours it's a little too early to say whether it does the personalisation thing as well as Netflix. Kids are a massive driver for these services, but housing their content next to violent police dramas can be fraught with issues if you're letting them have free-reign on what they watch with it. Stan does offer a function to create restricted profiles, for either kids under 12 or by classification - but it doesn't have the handy kids' button on the home screen to get straight to that section that Netflix does, and requires a little more fiddly navigation from a main account through the pull-out menu. I'd been meaning to watch the last few episodes of Breaking Bad for a while, but haven't managed to catch them on my Foxtel IQ box when they've been on repeat. So this was my chance. I splashed out on a Google Chromecast device, hooked it up to the tele, and settled back to watch the first episode without any issues. One of the things I noticed was the fact it seems to have a responsive streaming function, again similar to Netflix, which takes into account your internet connection and streams in high definition, higher-standard definition or standard definition. A handy function with Australia's fluctuating internet speeds. However, when I came to try to cast the next episode to the TV it wouldn't play ball - although I can't say whether that's a fault of Stan, Chromecast or a slightly crappy internet connection. Whilst it would play on the iPad directly, the sound was not great - and when I tried to link my bluetooth speaker to it it assumed I was trying to aircast to another device, and froze the picture on the iPad screen. Something of a glitch for a service which is set designed to be used on mobile devices. Despite the glitches my overall impression was good. It's still early days and the first time Nine or Fairfax has entered the streaming arena, and Stan isn't likely to be available to the public for another couple of weeks (although no launch date has yet been set) - so I expect there to be some refinements in the meantime. Ultimately content will be the key factor in determining which of the services locally lives and dies (and if they can wrestle viewers from the US version of Netflix). With a lot of content here also appearing on rival services the a solid user experience is essential, and with a little more tweaking Stan will be a very solid consumer proposition. Alex Hayes is editor of Mumbrella
- The industry constantly bemoans a lack of skilled new employees. In this opinion piece David Ponce de Leon argues they need to do more to help nurture the talent. The skills shortage issue continues to be a challenge for different sectors of the communications industry and at the dawn of a new year the topic seems to be heating up again. Everybody is talking about how hard is to find the right talent or the right skills for their own particular business needs. It’s almost as if a good old whine about the skills shortage ‘crisis’ has become the norm. Media, creative, digital, content, design, PR, data analytics. You name it. We’ve heard many agency principals expressing their frustration about this issue yet still doing nothing substantial about it. Starting with their own businesses. [caption id="attachment_212776" align="alignright" width="142"] Sangster[/caption] ADMA CEO Jodie Sangster recently offered a solution by suggesting: “More companies could invest in training individuals within the business to have those skills or encourage those from other career backgrounds to be up-skilled in the discipline.” Sounds easy, ah? But why aren’t more companies doing just that? Is it a bottom-line issue? Is it because training your own staff requires a certain investment of time and resources that companies are reluctant to undertake in the current economic climate? Is it because people in training or up-skilling are harder to charge for? All of the above? Whatever the reason, I cannot help but feel that somehow as an industry we are responsible for our own skills shortage. We’ve all heard that old chestnut of the talented graduate who desperately wants an entry level role but no one will give it to him/her as the role requires “at least two years” experience. How can this graduate gain any experience if nobody will give him/her a chance on the first place? Being involved with training and education for the best part of the past 10 years, I’m used to hear the same old arguments over and over again. “Your courses don’t prepare people for agency life.” “We need them to hit the ground running.” “I don’t have the time to babysit anyone.” Etcetera. The truth is, no school can teach those skills. Only the workplace can prepare people for the workplace. Undoubtedly, tertiary and industry education play a big role in the formation of communication professionals, but it is only at work that we get the skills we need, not by learning about it. Shortage skills in our industry are not solved with more academic courses, either. But they could be solved by workplaces growing their own talent. It’s not simple. It requires dedication, patience, and the scarcest of resources available nowadays: time. So this year, please, make it the year that you grow your own. If you’re not getting what you want or need from the pool of talent available, then please, start doing it yourself. But don’t just sit there. Put your hand up to be a tutor for one of our many industry courses. Volunteer to give a lecture on a subject close to your heart and expertise. Attend that graduation night. Get involved. But most importantly, open the doors of your agency to young (or older) people looking for a break and teach them, nurture them, support them, give of yourself to them. It’s not easy. It requires people skills, a passion for education and a desire of giving selflessly. This year, give it a try. You might be surprised. The person you need could be knocking at your door at this very moment. It might be one of those students you tutored. It can be one of those interns sitting across from you. It can be one of the young hopefuls you met at that graduation night. They are all around us. We just need to give them a chance and help them grow. Let’s make 2015 the year we grow our own. David Ponce de Leon is Creative Director at McCann Melbourne and was head of AWARD School Melbourne from 2010-2015 and is the current head of ADMA Creative School Melbourne.
- It might not be the mafia, but agencies require a cone of silence about their internal workings to the outside world argues Eaon Pritchard.
At the beginning of 'The Godfather', Santino 'Sonny' Corleone is in a clandestine meeting with Virgil 'The Turk' Sollozzo in which they discuss a potential partnership in Sollozzo's nascent heroin business.
Sollozzo arrives in New York but has already 'secretly' allied with the rival Tattaglia family, but still needs the Corleone family for further financial backing and to ensure protection from the police and justice departments in the city, whom the Corleones have in their pocket.
During Vito's polite refusal of Sollozzo's offer, Sonny - inscensed by Sollozzo's suggestion that the Tattaglia's would guarantee the Corleone's investment - breaks ranks and interrupts his father with an display of temper.
Vito calmly puts Sonny back in his box, and once their guests have departed expresses his disappointment with Sonny's indiscretion.
'Never tell anyone outside the family what you're thinking again'.
But the damage has been done. Sollozzo, noticing that underboss Sonny is prepared to undermine the Don starts to think that a good strategy would be to take out Vito.
Sonny's outburst not only undermined the Don but sowed the seeds for and undermining of the credibility of the entire Corleone family/organisation.
Many years ago, before my morphing into planner-ness, I was a designer in a small but emerging agency in London.
One Friday afternoon a not very senior client called up and asked the account person if we could make a small change to some element of an ad at the last minute before the thing was due out of the door.
Both the creative director and the planning director were out so the account person agreed, instructed me to make the change, the ad went off and that was that.
Later that evening I got a message from the planning director indicating we would be having a chat on the Monday morning.
By 'chat' it soon became clear that he meant getting the metaphorical shit kicked out of me by him and the CD.By making a - what seemed to me to be minor - change to the ad on the request of a junior client, without consulting the CD I had undermined the credibility of the entire agency. I had made us look like we didn't know what we were doing. I learned something that day. Several years and several agencies later I sat in a presentation to a brand new client at an agency I had just joined. The ECD was presenting a campaign to this new client. At the end of the show the client started making comments on the work and suggesting small changes to copy, edits and suchlike. The ECD sat stony faced while receiving the feedback and then removed the work from the table explaining that if the client didn't like the idea then we would take it away and come back with something else. The client wouldn't be put off, insisting that just a few of his changes and the work would be fine. To which the ECD responded, 'Thank you Mr [name], but we'll come back with another idea. I don't tell you how to make [product X] so please don't tell me how to make advertising'. That might look like arrogance to some, to me this was absolutely necessary. The creative credibility of the agency must be preserved, almost at all costs. This is not about stroking creative egos., I have had many a stand-up fight with CDs over the years. It's the planner's job to make sure the advertising is 'right'. For one's own credibility that means being prepared to scrap. However, those things happen behind closed doors. It doesn't matter how much I disagree with a creative director I would never voice that in a client situation or any other situation where his or her status could be undermined. We all know that a huge amount of work goes into making the advertising 'right'. But for the most part that work is behind the scenes. The focus and spotlight is on the creative output. So when non-creatives undermine the creative product - by unquestioningly agreeing to client whims or making their own suggestions in the presence of anyone outside of the ‘family’ - it undermines the entire agency.
The popular notion of 'ideas can come from anywhere' is in part to blame for these incidents. Of course ideas can come from anywhere, however that does not make them good ideas.Good commercial creative ideas tend to come from people who's job it is to have them. When you devalue ideas, you capitulate. When you devalue ideas, you undermine the whole agency. Before you know it you’ll become a chop shop and it's a long long way back. Never tell anyone outside the agency what you're thinking, again. Eaon Pritchard is planning director at Red Jelly
- Virtual reality technology is becoming a hot property. Here Tyler Greerasks whether it will really have a reach beyond video games. One day back in the early 90s I switched off the Sega Mega Drive and got myself along to an exhibition touting itself as the new frontier in gaming: virtual reality. Strapped in to a cumbersome, heavy piece of machinery I played Dactyl Nightmare, a dreadful Cubist nightmare which left me disoriented, ill, and disappointed for the state of the machine-human relationship. Not fast enough could I return to Sonic the Hedgehog and my new-found appreciation for the human-couch relationship. Fast forward 20 years and both VR and I are in a much better place, though only one of us is the star attraction of the 2015 Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. (Spoiler alert: it ain’t me). Yet for many of us, VR still sits alongside hover-boards and baldness cures: a sci-fi pipedream unlikely to be troubling us anytime soon. Mark Zuckerberg disagrees, and he recently stumped up $2b to purchase VR developer Oculus Rift to prove it. And he did so not because he wanted to shift Facebook into the gaming space; but rather because he is betting on VR being a significant player in the communications and social networking space. Beyond the dramatic improvement in technology, this is the critical paradigm shift that will be the rocket fuel for VR development and adoption. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEJjDhfULds Crucial to this is the other great buzzword which fell out of the CES this year, namely the Internet of Things. It’s perhaps confidence building to know that this was also the buzz term of CES 2014. This is important for VR in that it takes what was conceived of as a closed environment into the space of an open, connected one, and that changes everything. This means we can draw into the VR experience the other important elements of our lives – the people, the utilities, the shopping, the health diagnostics, the work. The lot. As always, technology begets technology. [caption id="attachment_271066" align="alignright" width="234"] Gaming has come a long way since Sonic[/caption] What it also begets, is advertising dollars. The question for those in media, branding and marketing is how to best be a part of this. VR will further entrench that most valuable campaign goal: engagement. Here we will have advertising tools that are monumentally impactful, allowing for consumers to experience deeply a brand experience. For those who believe in advertising as storytelling, the chance truly places the audience within a narrative, offering marketers a completely new way to tell a story. For travel brands, for sporting equipment, for movie and game promotion, for auto and clothing brands, cosmetics and health – almost any category sends the mind racing with creative potential. How consumers will move from experience to purchase through to advocacy will take forms we can scarcely yet imagine. And this is before we even start to think about dating networks. Perhaps the hardest thing to grasp is the grasping of it at all; accepting that it really might happen. Those of us old enough to remember 2006 felt the same way about social networking. But the groundwork is already being laid - every engagement-focused media in which brands allow consumer control is a lesson in how we will need to operate in VR. Engagement is critical now, and will be even more so in the future. Coca Cola, HBO and Nissan have all dipped their toe in the water. Yes they have advertising budgets that would give most CMO’s a nose bleed but if they are experimenting, it is time to at least take notice. It’s never a good idea to predict the future, at least not publically. But the convergence of game-led virtual environments, rapidly expanding connectivity, and wearable technology means that the VR experience is a legitimate reality. And it’s a reality that is likely to be built a bit less on pterodactyls, and a lot more on human connection. Tyler Greer is head of strategy, APAC, for Exponential
- After Australia Post was found to be paying for social media endorsements which were not disclosed and with more brands looking to social media influencers in their campaigns, Stephen von Muenster looks at where the law currently stands on the issue.
It is evident from a casual gaze through social pages or comms industry commentary that brands are turning to ‘social influencers’ to promote their products through online social channels with the intent of influencing consumer purchasing decisions in favour of their products.
Brands and their agencies are identifying and building commercial relationships with individuals, events or groups such as journalists, bloggers, Instagrammers, consultants, or industry analysts (directly or via influencer networks) to leverage them and build brand credibility within their identified following or ‘tribe’. This has sometimes been referred to as the Oprah Winfrey effect.
The product is sometimes overtly or subtly promoted by the influencer and the influencer does not always disclose that they have been rewarded. This gives rise to an important consumer law question - do social influencers need to disclose rewards and commercial connections with brands and products?
The question is important because consumers trust what is said online and a breach of that trust may result in a breach of the law. According to Nielsen Global Online Consumer Survey more than two thirds of consumers say they trust opinions stated online – second in trustworthiness only to recommendations from people they know in real life.
[caption id="attachment_270912" align="alignright" width="234"] Australia Post was caught using undisclosed paid Instagram endorsements[/caption]
For example, in December 2014 Australia Post came under fire after being caught out by consumers over its use of social media influencers, when it emerged it was paying Instagrammers without disclosing that their endorsements were being paid for.
Social influencers take many different forms, including:
Celebrities and personalities with a significant social presence and ‘tribe’ of followers
- Brand ambassadors
- Events / activities / sports (eg V8 Supercars)
- Bloggers and instagrammers
- Journalists (native advertising)
- Individuals that have received social notoriety purely from their social activities (eg You Tube videos)
- Product review sites – (eg App Store etc)
- that Mr Turpie had undertaken an interview during which he disclosed, in the presence of his wife, that he was losing his sexual potency, and
- that AMI nasal delivery system had cured or alleviated Mr Turpie of the effects of impotence or erectile dysfunction.
There is nothing illegal about paying someone to do an endorsement, but is a third party aware of the commercial relationship? What we ultimately say to businesses and bloggers is that you are on good safe ground if you disclose commercial relationships. When you’re not then you start running into this grey area that could potentially lead you to a messy end.”Michael Schaper, ACCC Deputy Chair, January 2014. The use of social influencers by brands and their agencies is growing in popularity but it is important that their influence is used in such a way so as to enhance the brand and its products and not result in negative commentary and legal liability. As the legal implications of using a given influencer and releasing a particular post must usually be considered on a case by case basis, we strongly recommend that legal advice and clearance be obtained and if possible an appropriate Social Influencer Agreement be entered into with the influencer that addresses the legal issues (including those discussed in this article) and mitigates brand risk appropriately. Stephen von Muenster is a solicitor and owner of von Muenster solicitors and attorneys.
- With over 3,600 exhibitors and hundreds of speakers there were a lot of new ideas and inventions at the Consumer Electronic Show (CES) in Las Vegas this year. Here Jonathan Pease distills them to the ten he's most jealous of. B BOOTH – They call themselves ‘The Talent Discovery Company’ and the concept is simple. Imagine a casting booth where anyone can audition for anything they like – modelling, acting, reality TV, singing, etc. There are two B Booth locations in LA and there are big plans to pop them up at malls all over America. This is not a brand new idea but what I like about this execution is that they appear to be hooked into Hollywood with a highly experienced executive team and real casting directors onsite at every B Booth. At scale, B Booth opens up endless opportunities for content development and creation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIygf0qL5NM BELTY – Emiota, a French-based startup, launched a great looking prototype device. It’s a smart belt that automatically loosens when you sit down and tightens when you stand back up. With embedded technology, the belt connects to your smart phone and will tell you when you’ve had enough to eat and when you’ve been sedentary for too long. You can easily imagine brands like Weight Watchers, Fitness First, or even health insurance companies jumping on the back of an idea like this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOwCNWTUAqo AIRDOG – An auto-follow ‘air leash’ for your go-pro drone. In plain English, it’s basically a wristband that makes your Go-Pro camera (when attached to a drone) automatically follow (and film) you everywhere you go. If products like Airdog gain traction I imagine we’ll see an increase in branded content featuring extreme sports, as this type of footage is going to be more cost effective to produce than ever before. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqO19Os12BI CHILD ANGEL – A stylish tracking bracelet for your kids (don’t worry it doesn’t look like a home arrest anklet at all). Maybe it’s because I recently became a dad but I really liked this idea. Using your smartphone you can track your kids, set ‘safe zones’ and be alerted if the bracelet ever gets removed. Feels like overkill for everyday use but highly relevant when you and your kids are in a new city or unfamiliar surrounding like an amusement park. EDYN – I wasn’t expecting to see much gardening innovation at CES but this idea really stuck out. Edyn is a super smart gardening system that taps into data from the local soil, weather conditions and general environment to optimise your ability to garden. Edyn is beautifully designed and 100 per cent solar powered. Like everything else at CES, Edyn syncs with your smartphone and allows you to control your garden from anywhere. With all that data Edyn has the potential to connect brands like Bunnings and Mitre 10 with avid gardeners just when they need those brands’ products the most. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srpbaWKLfGo PANONO – A soft, nerf-like ball with 36 embedded cameras. When you throw the ball in the air it automatically takes 36 photos when it reaches its highest point. A fun way to capture your experiences in all their full 360-degree glory, this idea has great applications for sponsors of large-scale events. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8xjXqC9m2A FUEL3D – As expected, there were lots of 3D printing ideas at CES. This full colour 3D scanner caught my eye because it solves one of the big limitations of 3D printing – not having a big enough scanner. FUEL3D is handheld and allows you to scan large objects in seconds. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsRTZ457N8U PRYNT CASE – A smart phone case that prints photos instantly. Think of it as a new age take on a Polaroid camera. From a marketing perspective, Prynt Case presents a simple way for brands to distribute printed material via a smartphone. I’m calling it Mobile Direct Mail. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7PQxqHpvtA STOREDOT – This was one of the most exciting things I saw at CES. It solves a universal ‘first world problem’ by charging your smartphone battery in under one minute… mind blown. StoreDot is an Israeli startup that already has backing from Samsung and Russian businessman Roman Abramovich. The technology hasn’t been proven and is not yet available to consumers but based on the demo I saw, it’s a red-hot idea. Interestingly, the technology was discovered during research into Alzheimer’s treatments. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_yq_f94z_M MERCEDES F015 ‘Luxury in Motion’ – Only a concept car at this stage, it was inspiring to witness how Mercedes see the future of driving. The F015 is a self-driving car that feels more like a luxury living room on wheels. The interior is unbelievable with wood flooring and egg-like swivel chairs. It really flips the concept of car travel on its head. Mercedes are clearly pushing the envelop with this car, so much so that after it’s global unveiling on the Vegas strip, we watched the car self drive itself through a red light and narrowly avoid a four car pile up. It happened about five blocks down the street from the PR launch and out of media eyeshot… lucky! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYTV4d-Gn0s Based on the variety and breadth of exhibitors at CES this year, it’s clear to me that every business now needs to consider itself to be, at least partially, in the tech business. Car manufacturers should no longer be building cars, they should be programming them; fashion designers should be thinking about the connectivity of their garments; and gardeners should be equipped to use the data they can now get from scanning soil. The game has truly changed. Jonathan Pease is managing partner at Tongue
- While many people don't know the difference between a social media manager and community managers Venessa Paech argues defining which one you need for a role is vital for success. I’ve led social media and community management for companies, hired, and worked with many social media managers and community managers. Let’s be honest – the two roles are often confused. The number of blog posts trying to explain the difference should be a tip-off. In Australia, for example, most Community Manager jobs advertised are actually Social Media Manager jobs. There are a few of reasons for this. One is that advertising agencies dominate the discourse around social media and online ‘community’ in Australia, so social media marketing trumps traditional online community building. There are fewer branded online communities in Australia than the US, where the distinction in the industry is more native. And of course, the market in Australia is a small one and it’s all but assured social and community professionals end up delivering both functions at some point. So we muddy our waters – what’s the harm? If you’ve got the wrong tool for the job, you won’t get the outcome you expect or need. You might be using the wrong strategy. Communities and social media solve different problems for businesses and organisations. Are you building brand awareness, or do you want to scale customer service? Does your roadmap take into account community life cycles over the long haul? (Communities take years to build and pay off more over time – a little like bricks and mortar). Communities are different systems to social networks, defined by the structure of their relationship matrix, not the platform they inhabit. You don’t know what you’re measuring Objectives, end goals, metrics for success, measuring tools and methodologies are very different for Social Media Managers and Community Mangers. Social Media Managers might look at engagement metrics around native social content, reach and amplification, social media sentiment and conversions (however that’s defined for the organisation in question). Community Manager measurement includes: membership funnels (visitor to registration), engagement ratios over time, volume and balance of strong and weak ties, progress toward member objectives, number of volunteers – and critically – community health (including sense of belonging, level of influence). If you don’t know what you’re measuring, you can’t define or achieve success. You’re devaluing both functions Saying an SEO Strategist is the same as a Digital Editor doesn’t do justice to either, even though a Digital Editor will have strong SEO skills and an SEO Strategist will understand the mechanics of great content. In particular, this conflation tends to disadvantage community builders, whose work is commonly longitudinal (complex peer-to-peer relationship building across many years) rather than campaign-centric. You’re hiring the wrong people for the job If you hire a Social Media Manager when you need someone to design a community strategy, you’ll be disappointed. It’s a different mission, with different timeframes and different skill requirements. You might also be facing wasted resources, morale issues and broken outcomes. What’s in a name? Community is about identity and investment, so it’s inevitably bespoke to at least some extent. But there’s a long history of established social science defining community structures and network structures that should inform us here. At a high level, social media is about reach. Communities are about relevance. Content is the glue of social media (formal or informal). Relationships are the glue of communities. They complement one another functionally and structurally. Deftly managed social media is an effective way to discover community member prospects and spark the journey to registration. Neither is better or worse – and together they’re the definition of an ecosystem. Many Community Managers have become adept Social Media Managers as social media platforms have risen to nest the conversations of our age. And great Social Media Managers understand the way people tick in ways similar to community builders and negotiators. We’ve developed deep and real appreciation for our respective functions and talents. But it’s a risk to assume we’re fluent in each other’s discipline, and riskier still to not match person – to role – to need. We can’t set objectives, define and measure success, or hire the right professionals if we don’t know whether we want people getting excited about our latest product, or a sense of belonging. If you’re hiring a social media or community professional in 2015, define your objectives very carefully to make sure you find the right talent to get you there. Venessa Paech is the senior manager for community & content at REA Group, and the founder of community management conference Swarm.
- As the MLA unveils its latest Australia Day lamb ad we give Credit Where It's Due to the legacy of clever campaigns which have come before it. Selling lamb is not the most glamorous of briefs for any marketer or agency, but somehow every year Meat and Livestock Australia's Australia Day campaign captures the public's attention. In little over a decade it has managed to turn lamb into the 'must have' staple for any good Australia Day party, making anyone who doesn't have it feel 'unAustralian'. This year it made the tough decision to move on from its brand 'Lambassador' Sam Kekovich to embrace a new brand message - and one that's probably more inkeeping with both modern day Australia and more shareable to boot. But while big Sam has a cameo, let's not forget some of the other things he was prepared to do in order to shift some meat. The campaign began small with what would become a classic Sam rant set against an Australian flag, with lines such as "unAustralianism is everywhere - for example, people wearing those plastic brightly coloured flip flop shoes with flowers on them? What's wrong with rubber thongs in simple primary colours? If I hear another person say thong when they mean those swimming costumes pouncy Brazilian fellows wear up their bums, I'll do my block". It was the beginning of an annual tradition. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dqsyXPkG3I 2006 continued the theme, with Sam Kekovich sitting behind a prime ministerial style desk and the national anthem providing the music. The ad largely followed the style set up the year before with Kekovich blaming the Australia losing the Ashes on a failure to eat lamb. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3w2xHOkhmY In 2007 while the format of the ad stayed the same with a Sam Rant, it was extended from around one and a half minutes to three minutes. It was the first version of the ad to feature Kekovich in a non-rant environment, travelling around Australia as a lambassador, including shots of Kekovich in a John Howard inspired tracksuit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkUnemSg3dg In 2008 Sam called for the abolishment of Australia Day, calling on a week to celebrate lamb and Australia. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPGSs56lZEQ Kekovich blamed the world's economy problems on "unAustralianism" in 2009 as the GFC struck. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzBG4k8aTus 2010 saw Kekovich take it to the next level and address the UN on the "problems of unAustralianism" and what could benefit from eating a lamb chop. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-I2wOaNXYlY Kekovich continued with his global theme in 2011, taking on Europe and blaming the Euro economy's problems on unAustralianism and a lack of people eating lamb. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1C89osd7Eic 2012 saw Kekovich return back to Australia and behind a desk with a rant in which he contributed Shane Warne's obsessive tweeting to a lack of a lamb chop. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Rx2fJuj4zs And who could forget the other part of that 2012 campaign which saw Kekovich take on the Aqua tune "Barbie Girl". We're not sure if a lamb chop could have improved his singing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UClVDQH5at0 It was in 2013 when the campaign started to get crazier. The scene was set for the campaign with Ten uploading a video to its YouTube channel last week which appeared to show Kekovich being injured by a misdirected cricket ball during a live cross with weatherman Tim Bailey. The campaign then saw Kekovich explain he had "lambnesia". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BB_u2k2gmY Last year's Australia Day campaign saw Kekovich urge parents to teach their offspring that lamb is the official dish for Australians, and features a giant baby stomping someone asking for tofu</a>. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9Xo0v63wMA Credit Where it’s Due is all about generating positivity about our fantastic industry. While we welcome positive and constructive comments, anonymous or otherwise, this feature a snark-free zone so please bear that in mind when commenting.
- While mobile is taking an increasingly large chunk of consumers' time marketers are slow to divert their ad spend. Google's Lisa Bora looks at how it can be used effectively to make compelling campaigns.
Does size matter? When it comes to screens, Australian advertisers seem to think so, devoting just 8 per cent of total ad spend in Australia to mobile, despite them taking up a third of total daily media consumption.
Will this change in 2015? Many Aussie advertisers say that they recognise the importance of mobile but are uncertain how to proceed.
If you’re in this position, here are three guiding principles that you may find helpful as you look to make your marketing more mobile-ready this year:
The three C’s of mobile content
Mobile content should tap into at least one of these three unique properties of mobile:
- Control: As a physical object, phones invite users to touch them. Incorporate this impulse into your campaigns by giving users the power to use their phone as a remote control, or as a means to interact with other screens. This is a great way to give your campaigns a more dynamic feel. One of my favourite examples of this is Cheetos’ Cheetapult game: the game is controlled by a mobile phone acting as a virtual slingshot to fling Cheetos from their phone into a video playing on their desktop.
- Context: If you’re anything like me, your phone follows you wherever you go. According to Morgan Stanley, 91 per cent of people keep their mobile within three feet of them, 24/7, 365 days a year. This rich combination of location and time gives marketers can context that can lead to innovative campaigns. For example, the 35-year old Sunshine Aquarium in Tokyo created a “Penguin Navi” app that used virtual penguins to help people navigate the 1km walk from the nearest subway stop. This resulted in a 152 per cent increase in attendance in one month, with no changes in programming or exhibits.
- Customisation: mobile is the ultimate personal platform. The more customisation you offer people, the more the will feel they ‘own’ the experience. Virgin Mobile’s Game of Phones allowed users to look for prizes that suited them, and chase them down when it was convenient.
Phone: 0424 100325
Listing last updated November 8, 2012 | Type of business: Media consultancy
Is this your listing? update it here
- Heidi Klum launches Intimates range in Melbourne with help from Cummins & Partners on
- American Sniper picks off top spot at the box office over the long weekend on
- Strategist Chris Stephenson moved to new regional role with media agency PHD on
- Seven sales boss: Australian market only big enough for two streaming players on
- Renault target women with new Clio ad from Task2 on
- Nick Kyrgios’ Australian Open clash with Andy Murray pulls huge audience for Seven on
- Strategist Chris Stephenson moved to new regional role with media agency PHD on
- Renault target women with new Clio ad from Task2 on
- Account Director/Senior Account Director
- Senior Account Director $120K pkg Ref:6924
- Group Account Director
- Account Director/Senior Account Director
- Senior Front/Backend Developer
- Programmatic Trading Manager – Rapidly Expanding DSP – c.$90k + Super + Bonus
- Ultimate Media Communications Co-ordinator Wanted
- Senior Account Director – Integrated – High Profile Account
- Ultimate Copywriter Wanted
- Brand Manager – Uncle Tobys Plus
- ABC facing calls to relinquish New Year fireworks coverage after renewed criticism
With 58 comments
- MLA's Australia Day campaign moves away from Kekovich rant to a Richie Benaud BBQ
With 41 comments
- Melbourne trust applies for trademark for 'Charlie Hebdo' and 'je suis Charlie' in Australia
With 32 comments
- Budget Direct ditches aliens and jingle in first ad campaign from 303Lowe
With 30 comments
- Facebook not a social network but a video platform says agency sales boss
With 28 comments
- Todd Sampson appointed to Qantas board
With 28 comments
- Why #tay4hottest100 is good for Triple J
With 23 comments
- KFC Facebook post may have disqualified Taylor Swift campaign from Triple J Hottest 100 list
With 21 comments
- ABC facing calls to relinquish New Year fireworks coverage after renewed criticism
- Cameron Swan promoted to CEO of Active International
- McGrath Foundation hires fundraising gun
- International Advertising Association (IAA) welcomes five new board members
- Fairfax Media announces appointments to its brand solutions and client development team
- Australian firm ECAL opens New York office
- Top Gear signs deal with TV3 in New Zealand
- Call for entries for 2015 Australian Effie Awards
- Bondi Advertising appoints head of technology
- D&AD teams up with The Future Laboratory to create trend reports
- Jael Napper & Kym Richardson launch Broadcast Connections