Let’s assume that one of the UK’s largest broadcast networks like iTV decided to stop all advertising efforts for Britain’s Got Talent. Would they cross their fingers and hope people talked about the shows around the water cooler at work? Would they hope that enough people added the show to their DVR list while it was being promoted heavily? Or maybe, they would wish for a 47 year old woman who would sing a song that was heard by millions?
Reports from Mashable show that Susan Boyle’s video is on track to reach 100 million views (not counting replays on talk/new shows, news shows, etc). What’s the implication here? Britain’s Got Talent received the equivalent of a super bowl sized audience because they were lucky enough to host a venue with the potential for amazing content. The show didn’t even have to create it. It simply established and promoted the venue. The formula we witnessed in this situation is:
BRAND X (TV Show) + CATALYST Y (Susan Boyle) = MASSIVE PROMOTION FOR BRAND X
The above formula isn’t a complex one, but the trouble lies in finding the perfect variables. iTV is a media company. For them to strike gold on a piece of content isn’t that unlikely. After all, they are in the business of distributing media so the Susan Boyle unintentional advertising campaign was bound to eventually happen in one form or another. Where this formula proves to be the biggest challenge is when embraced by companies that don’t have much to do with content creation. Packaged goods, automotives, etc, earn their profits from selling products not intangibles like entertainment or information. This doesn’t mean that these types of brands are excluded from trying to capitalize on unintentional advertising, it just means that they are going to have to roll the dice in terms of content creation (more often and perhaps with less of an agenda) in order to potentially reap the benefits of a viral piece of content.
Read the rest of this entry »
