Panasonic: We were clumsy in how we described the Rommy Gulla project
Panasonic has issued Mumbrella with a detailed response to questions about the authenticity of its The 28 Day Persecution of Rommy Gulla project.
In the Q&A, prepared by Panasonic’s PR agency Blackie McDonald, Panasonic concedes that it was “clumsy” in its execution of the project, which purported to show a member of the public having pranks played upon him with no warning of what was to come.
The Campaign Palace, which created The Persecution of Rommy Gulla, had initially insisted to Mumbrella that Gulla was not an actor.
The Q&A provided by Panasonic:
Don’t you think brands/companies need to be more authentic/ honest with consumers?
Yes and in this instance we could have done better. Specifically we could have provided more detail on how the program works, Rommy’s background, Rommy’s selection process and more. We’re trying to do this now by adding some background information to the Facebook page and providing publications like Mumbrella with more information.
How can you justify in deceiving the audience that this is real?
It was clumsy on our behalf. We could have been clearer in the way that we described the program and definitely better with our initial responses when asked about it. Essentially Rommy knows he’ll be pranked but not necessarily what that prank is or how it will happen. The occasional exception might be location.
If it’s not real then why are there inconsistencies in the ‘helium’ video, car opening, etc?
http://youtu.be/Gw2JztaSTnU
http://youtu.be/CqoZ5nrqdEo
Some of the footage has been shot or edited in a way to create this effect before the prank takes place. For example, on day two of the prank you can see the team opening his car without unlocking it first. We actually have copies of all of Rommy’s keys – car, house, etc – so the team opened it beforehand. The same went for with opening the window with the helium prank – the window was unlatched during the day while he was out. Of all the pranks the helium one was the most manufactured – because of health and safety concerns.
Wouldn’t it have injured the participant if you really filled his room with helium?
The actual amount of helium that used was quite small. In the video you see a tank and a hose being poked through the window. The helium was then turned on for a limited time. We received advice from a safety officer beforehand that this wouldn’t cause any health risks.
Why didn’t the participant wake up with all the lights and noise?
All assembling for the prank was done away from his bedroom, and the recorded sounds are a lot louder than in reality. A lot of the production involves a lot of preparation, waiting and hiding. It has been a big production challenge from this perspective.
Why didn’t you just shoot it straight and show the raw footage?
This is the raw footage, enhanced through editorial to tell a better story for the viewer. We wanted it to look good as well as be as authentic as possible within production limitations. I should point out, given the concerns, this is an area that we’re also looking at addressing for upcoming episodes.
Why did you deny that it was staged in the first instance?
We felt the important thing was that the reaction of Rommy to the pranks was genuine. To make it work we needed to control a lot of the parameters. We carefully plan and execute all of the pranks. The fact we are using a real guy and his real name shows our intention of keeping it as close to reality as possible. In retrospect we should have done better.
Why did you initially deny that the participant was an actor?
It was clumsy on our behalf. We should have called this out in the initial release. Rommy was one of about 40 people that we spoke to during the preparation for this campaign. Having a 9-5 job outside of any acting ambitions was in part the reason why he was chosen. In addition to the usual screening process, we also had to see how willing they were to participate for a whole month. It’s a huge call having someone upturn your world like this for a whole month.
What is the purpose of this campaign?
This is a small campaign for Panasonic but we didn’t want that to stop us from trying something new. It’s often difficult to differentiate products such as Blu-ray recorders and we wanted to do something that is fun.
Does Panasonic really think this is going to help them sell more Blu-ray recorders?
Yes, it’s a good creative idea for a product category that is often devoid of good creative ideas. Obviously we initially could have been clearer about the campaign; however response from our social media community has been really good. 1000 Facebook new fans and close to 20000 hits on YouTube in the first few days is not a bad start.
Wouldn’t you have been better simply just running a TVC?
No, the relatively small size of the campaign meant it wouldn’t have been effective as a TVC. A large proportion of the budget was dedicated to online media such as banners. Additionally reaching the target audience through traditional media is becoming increasingly difficult, hence the reason for trying a different approach.
Will the PR agency claim this as positive coverage?
No, we take management of our reputation very seriously and would not be so flippant as to claim “all news is good news”. We’re now working hard to make sure we clear-up any misunderstandings that we may have caused. In any instance, it’s been a good lesson for the company.
Are you worried someone might get hurt?
The agency went through great lengths to make sure the pranks don’t cause any harm. This includes referring to safety experts, testing the pranks and making sure we have adequate precautions in place when carrying out the pranks.
Who is Rommy Gulla?
Rommy is a 26-year-old from the Northern Beaches in Sydney. He is an aspiring actor but has a normal 9-5 job. You can look him up on the web if you’re interested.
Mumbrella then asked a couple of follow up questions:
In the helium video he has a squeaky voice. How was this achieved?
Rommy had consumed helium but the sound was enhanced in the mix to counter ambient noise during the raid scene.
And in the kitchen video did he know something was in the cupboard ?
http://youtu.be/X7BR_W8_TcI
Rommy knew something was in one cupboard but not what.
Today’s video:
http://youtu.be/9Ru3PatyV6w
Tim Burrowes founded Mumbrella in 2008. He worked on Mumbrella until 2021. At various points he was editor, content director and editor-at-large.
Linkedin
This is really silly campaign…
User ID not verified.
common sense at last.
ok, regroup, move on.
that electrocution one is funny! i laughed
User ID not verified.
How uncomfortable this has become……given the “relatively small size of the campaign meant it wouldn’t have been effective as a TVC” I’d love to know how much they are blowing on a month’s worth of staging, filming, editing, management fees etc.
The numbers look pretty ordinary and given the big interest burn-out that’s guaranteed to happen from here over the 28 days, I wonder what they will consider as successful come the end of it?
And what about all the extra resources to run around fixing the clumsy set-up of the campaign, when a simple TVC/radio/print campaign matched with some great retail incentives and an in-store promotion would have had the blu-ray players walking out the door while everyone at Panasonic/Palace/PR agency could have got on with the next project.
Spin it how you will, but this one’s a FAIL.
User ID not verified.
So they are still saying he doesn’t know what the pranks are going to be? And his reactions are genuine?
I don’t buy it. Look at today’s example, if you picked something up that gave you an electric shock would you:
a) Look to see if any other desk item’s were rigged
b) Follow the wires to see how it was done and unplug the battery
c) Swear loudly
d) Sit back down as if nothing has happened and pick up your tea, with no thought as to getting shocked again.
I think everyone would answer a, b and c!
User ID not verified.
Credit to mUmBRELLA for calling it out, but gosh, I lol’led. It’s a pretty funny campaign. You’re talking about it Tim. We’re talking about it. It’s working!
User ID not verified.
Agree totally with Trevor. Wouldn’t there be a slight OH&S risk with burning hot cups of coffee being flung around an office?!
Good of the company to finally tell the partial truth I guess…I do love their ad-speak euphemisms though. Eg: “clumsy”… aka “stupid”
User ID not verified.
This is a really stupid campaign and treats consumers like idiots. I was not going to buy a Panasonic product anyway, so this just solidifies my apathy/dislike towards the brand.
User ID not verified.
We’re talking about the campaign, but nobody’s talking about Blu Ray players. For mine this is silly because the campaign messaging really has nothing whatsoever to say about why this Blu Ray player is something I’d want. The campaign’s ignored the product and maligned the brand. FAIL.
User ID not verified.
What the hell is going on? Panasonic now come out and say Gulla actually knew there was something in the kitchen cupboards – just not which one! “Rommy knew something was in one cupboard but not what”.
“Essentially Rommy knows he’ll be pranked but not necessarily what that prank is or how it will happen”.
This statement is at odds with the PR release. It’s clear that Pansonic still have no idea how to manage the fall out – and what exactly will we be watching for the rest of the 28 days? – staged pranks, some staged pranks? that is not clear either. This is a master class in how not to run and manage a campaign. The best thing panasonic could do is pull the campaign – close it down end of story – kill it dead – it would all be forgotten in a couple of days. Otherwise there is still another 3+ weeks of potential PR disasters, blunders and lame pranks which can only do more harm. Surely even Panasonic can see that. Well done Tim for calling them out – I hope Dr Mumbo will continue if the campaign keeps running.
User ID not verified.
They are pretty funny though, right?
User ID not verified.
I don’t get how this is supposed to sell blu-ray players. It’s not even brand enhancing. What do (slightly mean) pranks do to create positive thinking around Panasonic or the product?
User ID not verified.
@LTLFTC
I would say that they COULD be funny if Rommy wasn’t expecting the prank and his reactions were real. To me this is like watching those obviously staged home video programs, ie the guy that happens to fall into a pond when someone throws a ball at him etc. It’s not funny because it is obviously not genuine.
In all honesty I had already ‘liked’ the Panasonic FB page, but this has made me unlike it!
User ID not verified.
@LTLFTC
No
User ID not verified.
1,000 new Facebook fans and thousands of views by a whole lot of people who drive clapped out cars like Rommy and have neith the income to purchase a Blu-ray recorder much less the cost of the blu-ray discs themselves.
They simply watch the stupid clips, cack themselves laughing and share it with their friends who do much the same and have just as little capability to purchase.
Please Panasonic, pull the pin on this rubbish and stop insulting the intelligence of the consumer. Treat them with some respect and leave these kids in their film school sandpit to play with their toys. Why are they clearly doing this rubbish at Panasonic’s expense.
Given the fact that retailers are finding it tough enough at the moment, particularly on products such as this with slim margins, it is nothing more than irresponsible to be spending all-too-rare marketing funds on such dross.
User ID not verified.
It doesn’t matter if he is a real person or an actor. I don’t think they make that claim anyway.
Obviously these are entertainment for a product.
What’s Mumbrella’s issue? And while I am at it, what the hell is Mumbrella all about, you act like some crappy trash mag tabloid.
User ID not verified.
“Rommy had consumed helium but the sound was enhanced in the mix to counter ambient noise during the raid scene.”
By ‘enhanced in the mix’, do you mean ‘pitched up to sound like he was breathing helium’?
In other words, faked?
They’re still not being honest.
User ID not verified.
How did his electrified coffee cup get coffee in it in the first place? Looks like he’s trying to imply he’s about to drink from it, and it clearly splashes near the camera at the end of the clip, but the cup seemed empty when it was wired up! Are we therefore to assume he’s going to drink from yesterday’s leftover coffee?
And his reaching for the stapler seems staged too – without looking at it he reaches across to pick it up… to staple what? He doesn’t seem to have gathered up any papers to clip together. Isn’t that what most of us do before we reach for the stapler?
Authenticity is key in these sort of campaigns and the staging has “here’s today’s script Rommy” written all over it.
I still don’t think Panasonic are being 100% open about the filming process on this campaign.
User ID not verified.
This is too easy and so much fun poking holes in this stupid campaign. The coffee cup – as Raff commented above – how did it get steaming hot coffee in there, as it was empty when wired? When Gulla picks it up – you can see he actually sees the cables – and although he has already been shocked – does not attempt to put it down. Also if you listen closley when gulla gets shocked by the stapler (32 – 34 seconds)you can actually hear someone almost directly behind him (I guess the camera man) trying really hard to suppress his laugh. I am amazed that Panasonic is going to let this play out when it so lacks integrity, and honesty – values I thought until now Panasonic would stand for as well. I guess not. In the mean time keep them coming – it’s great fun poking holes in these supposed pranks – it’s just a shame that it’s at the expense of a client and what once was a cool brand.
User ID not verified.
I think you’re better off stopping it. It may get pocked up by gruen et al and get worse.
User ID not verified.
You must be soooo proud of yourself Tim.
Bagging out a client and an agency trying to do something a bit more innovative and interesting in a tough market.
Get a life you lot.
User ID not verified.
So an agency and client should be allowed to mislead the public. By their own admission Panasonic states it could have done a much better job and were clumsy. There is nothing wrong with pushing the envelope and trying to be a bit more innovative – but hey, in this case – the agency and client created their own reality. Is rommy an actor? yes. fine. But by telling a lie,dening it on numerous occasions, being incompetent (even the Palace PR person had no idea – when it is their job to know the facts) and generally misleading – then you should expect to be challenged. Creative advertising that really pushes the limits is fantastic and should be encouraged at every opportunity, but sloppy, misleading and untruthful advertising should not be given an easy ride just because as you said ” it’s a tough market”. That is just crazy and makes no sense at all.
User ID not verified.
…didn’t NAB’s breakup campaign use actors and some staged scenarios to get the message across (e.g. footage from competitors boardroom meetings etc)? what’s the big deal, its a small campaign, different idea – maybe not awesome execution,but that’s not different to most of the crap out there.
User ID not verified.
Kudos to Panasonic for providing more information (at least to the group of ad-obsessives reading Mumbrella), it brings a token of authenticity.
I can appreciate the challenge of organizing and filming the ‘pranks’ and keeping a video narrative (raw footage would help though).
The campaign still doesn’t have many redeeming features and doesn’t fit the brand values of the company.
I don’t see how 28 days of torture helps cement Panasonic’s brand value. Each clip makes me more sympathetic to Gulla and less interested in the brand.
I don’t know which market segment is likely to say “it’s so cool watching that noob get tortured each day – Panasonic is so excellent and edgy, let’s go buy a blu-ray”.
User ID not verified.
It has a guy acting, it has editing, it has sound engineering, it has wardrobe and props, it has a pack shot, it has a call to action, it has a decent budget.
It’s a TV campaign run online and as such it’s fine.
Why did Panasonic chose to pretend it was ‘authentic’ when it was so obviously not?
I just don’t get it!
User ID not verified.
Done a little checking with some associates over the last few days and Panasonic appears to be removing all comments critical of the campaign from their Facebook wall.
This includes non-abusive constructive criticism.
Clearly there are some sensitivities at Panasonic around open and honest customer engagement.
User ID not verified.
I find the comments above incredibly frustrating. It’s extremely rare to find a client willing to try something different.
In my humble opinion, Panasonic should be applauded and supported for their bravery. Not torn to shreds for daring to be different.
And no, I don’t work for Panasonic ( or the Palace). But I do wish that we had a couple more clients like them.
User ID not verified.
Funny? Maybe.
Creative for creative sake? Definitely.
The Panasonic message? Lost in the creative.
Sell more Panasonic gear? I doubt it
User ID not verified.
This looks like an agency said ‘we’ve got this cool idea we want to execute now lets see what client we can retro-fit it to’ but without the actual brand relevance part.
It might well be a ‘brave’ but it doesn’t seem to have anything to do with the brand or the product. Last I heard thats what advertising and marketing is supposed to do. Industry luvvies might think it’s awesome…but I’ll bet consumers respond with ‘Huh?’
User ID not verified.
I’m with Gash #19. this campaign is better than 95% of the stuff out there. it breaks a formula, takes some risks and stands out from the crowd while saying something interesting about the brand.
yes, they told some porkies when their ‘secret’ got discovered….but have you guys never done this?
time for all of you holier than thou pinko lefties to get back to eulogising Steve Jobs on Facebook
User ID not verified.
I bought a Panasonic video camera recently because I researched it online and it was the most highly recommended, and I found it at a price I was prepared to pay. At no time was I interested in pranks, gimmicks social media or electrocuting someone for lols. For me when buying tech gear quality and price are all that matters. These silly waste of time and money do NOTHING for me when it comes to choosing a Panasonic or another brand.
PS The camera was a HDC-SDT750 for $890.
User ID not verified.
When will the ad industry learn that it is not always about being ‘creative’ and ‘innovative’.
It is crucial to establish, support and reinforce brand values.
Creativity for creativity’s sake can damage brands.
Yes take risks, but ensure they fit the brand profile, what it or what the brand custodian wishes it to be, and are well tested and managed so the downside is controlled.
Gash, Gavin & flesh peddler – don’t get caught on the bling. Advertising is about selling product, not allowing aspiring ad industry plebs to throw away client money and credibility on their careers.
If you’re able to build a trust relationship and talk your client into ‘anything’ that means you have an even greater level of responsibility to act in your client’s best interests. It does not mean you can prostitute your client to show off your ‘creativity’ and build your career on their wreckage.
BTW in every other industry criticism is a vital part of the learning process. The attitude of people afraid of criticism only demonstrate that you do not have what it takes to be successful in your lives. Rethink.
User ID not verified.
These pranks are just getting out of control! The Electrocution one is just plain dangerous! This makes me think of Panasonic as a bullying and cruel brand!
User ID not verified.