Looking through the "right" lens

By now we're all burnt out on the Aqua Teen Hunger Force fiasco. But, due to the "Hair Scare" press conference that ensued the day after--and some comments I've seen labeling the piece as 'brilliant' and 'great exposure'--I'm concerned some may be viewing this video through the wrong lens. And viewing plans, programs and strategies through the right lens is priority #1 in our profession. Using any other lens than the one our customers see us through is myopic.

To be sure, upsetting consumers, using police resources and not responding to the issue until 9 hours after the first 'hoax' was found are the leading issues. But this four-minute video below (RSS readers: go here) damaged our profession in equally profound ways.

As marketers we know the professionals from the amateurs, we know best practice from parlor tricks. But the public--you know, those consumers we serve--do not. Point blank: consumers now equate this response as the industry's response. Yep, they equate THEM as US. Their carelessness as our own. Consumers won't take the time to read through our blogs, they'll only view this piece on the news. And they have this disgraceful, disrespectful piece to view us through for eternity (the beauty and bane of YouTube).

This is not art. Art is generous, advancing (apparently these 'artists' didn't take the most basic of art classes, or they'd know that. Duh.). This was selfish, stunting. Interference and Turner Broadcasting System not only owe an apology to the public...they owe a BIG one to we practitioners who relentlessly work to get closer to our customers, develop superior experiences for them and push for better practices across the industry.

Comments

[Mack Collier]

"Point blank: consumers now equate this response as the industry's response. Yep, they equate THEM as US. Their carelessness as our own. Consumers won't take the time to read through our blogs, they'll only view this piece on the news."

Yep, to the public, this wasn't a case of one marketer doing something idiotic, it was a case of something idiotic by 'another one of those marketers'.

[Fritz]

An an opposing view from a security expert at http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/02/nonterrorist_em.html

Quote: What isn't funny is now the Boston government is trying to prosecute the artist and the network instead of owning up to their own stupidity. The police now claim that they were hoax explosive devices. I don't think you can claim they are hoax explosive devices unless they were intended to look like explosive devices, which merely a cursory look at any of them shows that they weren't. "It had a very sinister appearance," [Massachusetts Attorney General Martha] Coakley told reporters. "It had a battery behind it, and wires." For heavens sake, don't let her inside a Radio Shack.

[V-+a%S(p#E*rsT=`hE..]gra_Te[]

I love these guys. I hate the mainstream media and I am working hard to destroy in, with wikis, blogs, and other peaceful ethical means.

This, to me, is avant garde vs. paranoid idiocy. Most Americans seem like chumps,mediocres, and cowards...compared to the vigorous moral activism required by this hate permeated world.

My points in favor of these guys:

(1) No crime was committed.

(2) No violence was intended.

(3) No police were needed.

(4) No ethics were violated.

(5) It's becoming difficult to entertain, educate, or engage the attention-deficit, high-speed, jaded culture ...

(5 1/2) ... which is why the usablity (or "effectiveness", the impact, if you wish) of terrorist beheading videos (limply, always, robotically, refered to as "gruesome" by MSM) is so extremely low: we Americans love violence, dimemberment, violence against women and innocents.

(5 3/4) We condemn these fellers, but smile as our children obsessively fiddle with beating ladies with golf clubs, Grand Theft Auto and flock like lemmings to Smell Gibson films of Passionate Ultra Violence, against Jesus or Aztecs or Blacks or Jews, it's all the same to them.

(6) It's stupid to think blinking cartoon character squares are bombs. "Hey everybody, look at me blinking comically! I'm probably a bomb!" We are a severely dumbed-down nation.

(7) The city mishandled the situation and blew it way out of proportion, Making It Viral!!! )))--: thus, in a deconstructivist auto-immunitary, anti-antigenic reactivity that was the real humor, even funnier and stupider than the Hairstyles of the 1970s press conference.

(8) I applaud and upload the mullets and afros, the crew cuts and buzz mohawked ubanity of discomfited fits.

(9) "The reaction to the Machine is as automatic (and thus machinal) as Life Itself." -- "Faith & Knowlege", ACTS OF RELIGION, Jacques Derrida.

[V-+a%S(p#E*rsT=`hE..]gra_Te[]

Corrections: "ubanity" shd rd: "urbanity", "working hard to destroy in" shd rd: "working hardly to destroyit."

[CK]

Vaspers: You say no ethics were violated but harm was done. For instance:

So no care for the people who needed, but couldn't get to their doctor appointments because the roads were closed? That's harmful to their health. A permit would have solved that.

And no care for the minimum-wage worker who lost a full day's wages at [insert fast-food chain of choice here] because they can only afford the (closed-down) subway and not a car, car insurance and parking? Wait...even if they had a car they couldn't get there. A permit would have ensured they could make their bills (as I doubt the fast-food chain of your choice will still pay them for loss of wages). That harms a person living paycheck to paycheck. Just ask one them.

If we are dumb, then why couldn't these smart guys--or Turner--think to call the city at the first sighting to avoid the implications? That's harmful.

Taking resources away from real problems didn't do harm to people in need? There exist finite resources and I'm pretty sure the number of crimes exceed the resources. That's harm.

But where harm was NOT done is to the very entity you want destroyed: the MSM. The mulllets gave them more fuel for the fire. Which harms your plight to destroy them, no?

Yep, mostly only little people were harmed. And our profession.

And the mullets/fros are actually not non-comformists (they're merely conforming to their own audience). A classic read on this is "Influence" by Cialdini where he explains this through different social groups conforming to their own while claiming to be non-comformists to all. I think you would like the read if you haven't already caught it.

[CK]

You got to do multiple responses, so I get to also Vaspers (ha, ha!):

You say, "I applaud and upload the mullets and afros, the crew cuts and buzz mohawked ubanity of discomfited fits."

These aren't discomfited fits per se. These are paid employees. This was for a buck and for more attention to...wait...make more bucks!

There's no higher purpose at work for these guys, unfortunately. Wish there was.

[David Armano]

Look, I'm going to boil this down. I really appreciate art. Munch, Modigliani, Picasso, The Masters, Warhol... lots of different styles and time periods including modern and post modern. But when I go to a show and there is a piece of dried dung on canvas, I usually pass by that one pretty quickly even if there is a crowd "buzzing" around it saying how "avant garde" it is and what a profound statement it makes.

So maybe this comes down to personal preference. Personally, I don't think the liteboards were anything to write home about and the best thing to have happened to these gentlemen was the case of mistaken identity. So they got lucky at the expense of a city and maybe a few marketers to CK's point.

But to me it's still dried dung.
Dried dung and a dead horse I should say... :)

[CK]

Thanks DA.

While the dried dung can be purchased (the painting)...at least that was to make a social statement (agree with it or not). And even that artist had a permit--if we're referring to the painting in the BMA several years ago.

But these liteboards were to sell products: both existing product (the TBS show) and an upcoming one (the movie). That's what I meant about no higher purpose.

Yep, that poor horse has taken many beatings ;-).

[V-+a%S(p#E*rsT=`hE..]gra_Te[]

This was viral marketing, with "do no evil" writ large upon it, it was playful, in an onto-theological landslide sense, the topsy turny thorn of blistering look LOL>.

[V-+a%S(p#E*rsT=`hE..]gra_Te[]

An American city brought to a standstill, with lost wages, due to blinking cartoon characters. Now that IS funny.

[V-+a%S(p#E*rsT=`hE..]gra_Te[]

one day of discomfort and unwarranted fear

[Drew McLellan]

CK,

You are correct, there are many layers of people who paid a price for this stunt. The city, the people frightened, the people inconvenienced by not being able to move their families, employees etc through their day.

What I find most worrisome about this whole incident is that it seems a whole "collection" of people are comfortable trivializing the consequences.

Even if David were wrong (and I don't believe that he is) and this stunt is indeed art. The question should remain the same. At what cost?

We have to boil this down to the very basics. This was all to promote a movie. Not a life-saving drug or to save a starving child. This was about selling more movie tickets at $9.00 a pop.

I'm very proud of our profession and I think we add great value. But let's be very clear about the value we bring in comparision to the price paid. I believe its our responsibility to be sure those scales stay in proper balance.

Drew

[CK]

Drew: Yup. Thanks for saying it so eloquently.

Vaspers: MSM likely got a spike in ratings from an audience of wannabe rogue marketers who now want--more than anything--to be featured on MSM. The movie won't benefit in sales, but MSM's ratings by a new/larger audience will.

These guys you love aren't working to destroy media, these stunts (especially the video) ensure its continued success.

[Fritz]

The harm done was by the actions of the authorities in Boston. *THEY'RE* the ones who should be held accountable. They brought the entire city to a standstill for nothing.

If the police reaction was warranted, the terrorists now know that it is *sooo* easy to wreak economic havoc on our nation. They don't need real bombs -- just put some LiteBrites on overpasses and they've achieved their goal.