Marrying Meme and Marketing

A few weeks ago we wrote about how the meme (rhymes with theme) is the future of marketing. A meme is a small, compact piece of ‘idea’ that often moves through culture at dizzying speeds, if done properly. Its medium is generally seen as the internet, but it’s actually completely driven by public opinion, interest and excitement. A meme conforms more to the biological nature of a virus than it does to the static nature of a marketing campaign.
Meaning that everyone who ‘touches’ it often passes it on with an infectious description like- ‘OMG, check this massive bridezilla wigout.’
That was the dream response the Sunsilk team was looking for as they hatched a plan to explore their idea. They decided to test whether or not their ‘wigout’ concepts were meme worthy, i.e.: conforming to the very exciting, very shareable, very sticky kind of execution that a meme needs to flourish.
The brilliant Kjirsten Georgison set out with a team (John Griffith, Jane Canapini and Michelle Smyth) to explore and harness the power of ‘wigouts’. The shore she landed on was youTube. And the rest is history. And for once, we really mean that.

Comments

[David Jones]

So, are you guys claiming victory here? Does the client benefit from being part of a marketing driven hoax masquerading as consumer-generated-content?

And why is the video removed from youtube?

[Jacquelyn]

I am looking forward to learning more about the long-term strategy here -- it seems like we're still in the dark in areas. How does Sunsilk fit in? Where's their piece of the pie? No doubt there's more to come. I am waiting with bated breath...

Oh yeah, and I was one of those people convinced the video was real, so many thanks for the laughs!

[Tony Chapman]

First a comment to David. No one is claiming victory, or defeat. The intention wasn't to sell cases, or too build brand equity - it was simply to create a term for the emotional reactions that happen from bad hair. We removed the video from You Tube, to ensure that when we came forward with our television advertisment, it was clearly time to talk about the brand. Jaccuelyn - stay tuned.

Jacquelyn

[David Jones]

Ooooooookay. Point taken. Mission accomplished. But at what cost?

I'm an advocate for honesty, transparency and authenticity.

No doubt it's a great piece of viral work. Couldn't it have worked without the obfuscation?

I can't be alone in feeling duped into being part of a surreptitious marketing initiative.

While no company or product was mentioned, I still feel this fails to meet the WOMMA ethics code for "honesty of identity."

http://www.womma.org/ethics/code/read/

[JK]

Hey if you all want to get in touch with the girls go to http://www.bridezillamedia.com

http://newteevee.com/2007/02/06/what-to-do-on-day-2-of-viral-fame/ to prove that it's theirs

[Mathew Ingram]

I think that's a good point, David. And some industry types made similar comments in this marketing story (http://tinyurl.com/ysf8rp) that my colleague Keith McArthur did for the Globe (a link to which is conspicuously absent from bridezillamedia.com)

[Brendan]

Dave, I think I have to respectfully disagree, as I don't believe it does contravene any of the WOMMA ethics codes, given that it doesn't involve any actual endorsement - real or fake - of a product. It is a stage-setter, an attention-getter, but it makes no promises, offers no incentives or recommendations from unsuspecting third-parties, it doesn't tell anyone what to say, and I don't think it makes an endorsement even by implication... unlike the PSP flogs, for example... and doesn't impact society in a potentially harmful way, unlike the situation in Boston. I would be disappointed if we became so cynical about creative marketing that interesting campaigns like this disappear for good. Good debate.

[David Jones]

Hey, Brendan. I hope Cap C doesn't mind us PR types going toe-to-toe on their bandwidth, but vive la conversation!

You're probably right about the WOMMA bit as far as letter of the law goes, but I think the spirit calls for full transparency.

I love creative marketing, too, and so does Cap C. They do good work without jamming 30-second spots up the client's wazoo. So, I'd never be cynical about good marketing.

I think the spot is great for all the reasons you mentioned, but I feel a little had. It's similar to the big breweries choosing not to put the Molson or Labatt name on their more crafty looking products. The beer still tastes good, but the aftertaste is bad.

And, to fuel this discussion even more...I can't help feeling there is some parallel between this and the PR equivalent that is now popularly referred to as astro-turfing.

[David Jones]

Upon further reflection, I don't think it even comes close to astro-turfing. That was off-side.

Apologies.