Video is no replacement for good strategy

Yesterday I was trying to mount a case to use words rather than video – however my Internet searches all basked in the glory of video effectiveness. I cry BS.

When on a website, I want to read and skim at my own pace – then look at a video (just to see the product/service in action). I feel that videos force me to be a captive audience member to a slow talking/light on detail promo reel.

i began reading as a sceptic but wound up a believer. Good piece, and nice summation of the plague that seems to infest so many marketers:
“It seems to me that in a scramble to keep up with the latest marketing tools, we have taken our eyes off the prize; fear of missing out (or FOMO, as the innovative millennial community has branded it) and fear of being seen as ‘traditional’ has seen many of us veer further and further away from our real mission”.
This obsession with the shiny new thing does our profession a huge disservice. There is nothing wrong with doing what is proven to work rather than what might work. To the contrary, in an industry with hard-to-prove ROI, you could argue that reallocation away from proven methods requires a very high potential ROI to justify the experimentation. The fact that it’s so easy to distract marketers probably indicates that too few have built up a defensible ROI proposition that they’re constantly grasping at apparent salvation in the form of the shiny new thing.

And that’s exactly my point, Evan. Video (and feel free to replace that word with Pinterest, SEM, print advertising, etc. – the list really does go on) is simply a means to deliver a message.

Before you choose the delivery you need to consider your audience and your product and you need to ask, ‘Is this right for us?’ And if the answer is “no’… that’s okay.

I’m not some luddite who refuses to move with times; But I’m also not someone who will get swept up in the platform of the day without fully understanding what I want to achieve.

@sammy
I find the easiest way to cut through the nonsense is to ask, ‘Why?’ A simple question, but you’d be surprised at how few people can back up their plan with real substance.

I’m never going to stop my team from taking chances or from trying new things – but I do require that they fully understand what they are trying to achieve (and of course how they will measure success).

But surely, there is bad video and effective video just as there are bad print, bad radio ads (especially) – anything can be ineffective if not done properly. Video is not a big bad bogeyman when used in the proper context.

@David

Thanks for reading and you’re 100% correct. As I said, the point isn’t to denigrate video as a medium. The point is to question ANY channel that doesn’t have a solid strategy behind it.

The only reason this resonates with me right now is because we, as marketers, are presented with so many new channels and platforms – almost daily. Just because video (or twitter or remarketing or whatever) work for some, it shouldn’t mean we blindly leap in and invest resources, without understanding what we want to achieve.

Buggles couldn’t have put it more succinctly, and although Video Is No Replacement For Good Strategy was unlikely to be chosen as the opening song on MTV it would have had my vote.

So, think about channel and plan?

Video killed the exhibition star?

All mediums have a place, most budget won’t extend to all mediums, you need to be skilled at what ever you do or it won’t work as well as you want it to.

Thanks for reinforcing business 101 – measure twice, cut once.

@Andrew D

But do all mediums have a place in all businesses? I would question that. Not just from a budget perspective, but from a customer perspective too. For example, how many pensioners are currently on Snapchat?

@ Adam Woods

Depends on your scale and your targeting – Walmart, for example, has realised 100,000+ different customer profiles via data segmentation. Is there a medium for each one, possibly, can their budget scale that far – probably not.

Nice segue into validating where video helps the most. It allows you to build owned content, for various customer groups in whatever stage of the buying/using cycle they are in. These groups/ or communities then have the potential to assist in the distribution through sharing, commenting, showing, bloggers using as links, use on IN-store TV, you-tube, video seeding etc etc. Not many mediums can do that.

Re older folks on snapchat – once a community is built i can assure you the technology will probably be used…old doesn’t mean useless at tech. (btw not a pretty picture but neither is G Edelsten and he seems to do OK)

🙂

Didn’t bother answering Dwaine – gingerist I say

I reckon this article could’ve been better – i.e. done as a video explaining why a video isn’t necessarily the right approach in all cases.

As someone who runs a video production company I agree with you, Adam.

Video is bandied around as a cure-all and people place all these metrics on its performance regardless of its quality. It is funny hearing “video” and “content” being spoken of as abstract marketing concepts which lead people to thinking more video is better, rather than better video (or any form of communication) is better. It’s the same with white papers, infographics, top ten lists and the whole perceived notion that producing a lot of content is a content plan in itself.

The rush to produce more and more is driving budgets and production quality down which drives us closer towards content fatigue – when people will be saturated by the noise and only the really interesting stuff or the stuff with the most spend behind it will stand out.

A great way to put it, Matt. Better video, rather than more video. Here here! That’s where I’d put my money. Make a splash, think big, get above the noise. And, most importantly, give it a reason for being.