This is news? “Clickbait” journalism in the digital-social age.

Where’s Mr. & Mrs. Waldo?

While reading the “newspaper” online I came across a couple stories that captured my attention. I clicked on them both not because they were newsworthy (they weren’t) but because they appealed to my socially & digitally trained brain. The same brain that grew up reading long form magazine pieces in The New Yorker and Field & Stream; not to mention spending hours slowly devouring the Sunday paper, digesting sections like a python moving rodents down its throat.

That was then.

These stories are classic examples of the sort of content we feed on now. Both are fairly meaningless by old-school journalism definitions. Nobody died or got hurt. Nothing really is at stake.

The story about vandals knocking over a sandstone goads us into clicking its link, pushing our buttons to judge and to vilify. In this way it is like those “news” stories about drunken beachgoers tormenting a baby dolphin. We have to see these cretins and pillory them. Seeing for ourselves is made possible by amateur video or photography.

The other story functions in the same way but by pushing completely different buttons. The author beseeches us to try and find the “mystery couple” from this “Instagram-worthy…magical photograph.” The picture is of a bride and groom posing on a pretty spot in Yosemite. They are not famous. The photographer is not important. The location is unquestionably on infinite tourist-y photo albums. The chance discovery and the chance to discover are what makes this story click-bait.

Not long ago neither piece would be considered news. Now they probably get more clicks aka readers aka viewers than headlines about bombs falling in Syria.

The Grammys and The Walking Dead. Living (and dead) proof that event TV can thrive in the Internet age. As well as advertising.

Adelle and one of her many Grammy awards…

“I ate my Grammy!”

Last night was a big night for television and social media alike. Not only was it was the 54th annual Grammy awards but The Walking Dead reanimated for the second part of its second season. Both events garnered beaucoup viewers of the most desirable demographics, which meant a ton of buzz on Twitter and Facebook.

I had a ball participating with the Grammy telecast, syncing my jibes with friends and followers. And judging from my Twitter feed you did, too. In a very real way, being able to play along with the telecast made watching it infinitely more fun. Not so long ago, the Grammys would have come and gone without me. Unless I knew ahead of time that one of my favorite artists was performing I just didn’t give a damn. Knowing I could play Mystery Science Theater to the show’s foibles and fantastica made it must-see and must-comment TV. That troubled music icon, Whitney Houston died the day before only added to the juice. We needed to see what they, the music industry, would do. Her passing, plus the return of singer-songwriter Adelle after a lengthy hiatus, made the Grammys a perfect storm for fans and voyeurs alike.

Mystery Science Theater 3000, ahead of its time.

The Walking Dead even has a show dedicated to such fans called The Talking Dead, where fans discuss what just transpired interacting with each other and the show’s host and his guests. On AMC’s website one can view extended clips of next week’s episode as well as view countless insider peaks at the making of it. We become involved with the show in ways unimaginable to previous generations.

Like the Superbowl a couple weeks ago, event TV is flourishing not fading in the new world of social networks. Shows like American Idol, The Academy Awards and other televised contests only benefit from fan involvement. Experts and pundits call this engagement. And indeed it does seem a better verb than watching. To use another popular word, the “experience” is vastly improved. (In fact, this year’s Superbowl and Grammys had the most viewers of all time.)

Marketers wisely play along, knowing that their commercials will become part of the “conversation” as well. The savviest of the bunch provide social components, offering content that not only synchs with the telecast but stimulates viewers into behaving as well. Honda’s much-hyped parody of Ferris Bueller’s Day Off contained numerous hidden references to the movie, urging fans to re-examine the spot to try and find them. This cross-examination undoubtedly led to millions more views on the Internet, not to mention publicity in magazines, newspapers, radio and TV shows.

Deja-vous. Ferris has been here before.

For networks and producers social media has the desired effect of drawing people to the actual telecast, as opposed to watching it later via DVR. There’s little joy in Tweeting to the encore presentation of The Walking Dead or any other show, no matter how popular. This makes appointment television relevant. Again. It also provides advertisers incentive to create better work so that, it too, can be part of the conversation. Undoubtedly, this will lead to more creativity in advertising. Good news to all of us who make ads for a living.

Update: More living/dead proof from Adage

Is controversial advertising no longer a bad thing? As a matter of fact, it might be part of the plan.

Dying for your business…

Recently, a billboard went up for A&E’s gruesome but popular new series, The Walking Dead. For those unawares, the show is about dead people returning to life to feed on the living, aka Zombies. In this case, the board went up alongside a funeral care business, prompting countless media commentary on the “unfortunate” placement. It wasn’t just the local media that was provoked but all across America stories and pictures ran –sometimes negatively, mostly humorously- detailing the “unfortunate” juxtaposition of message and location.

After which, of course, the billboard company promptly issued an apology, calling it human error and an unfortunate mistake, and took down the ad.

Unfortunate? In one day I saw this image in my morning paper, in two of the blogs I read and on the TV news at night. That’s not tragedy, folks; that’s a windfall. For the price of one billboard, A&E got more coverage than they ever would have imagined for their show without paying a dime. And since it was editorial coverage, not advertorial, chances are great that viewers of it were actively engaged as opposed to benign.

And yes, while it may seem an unfortunate event for the funeral home, I’m betting they benefited from all the attention as well. Frankly, I’m not sure that’s even a consideration anymore…

Whether they or we like it or not, social media has broken down barriers, influencing our culture profoundly. We are no longer as shy about awkward moments. On the contrary we seem to get off on them. What once was considered embarrassing is now considered entertaining, interesting and provocative. Advertising is often the catalyst for this perfect storm. Outdoor is usually the touchstone.

Peek-a-boo!

In the above example, a health spa put up a somewhat risqué billboard advertising its waxing services. Someone inevitably complained but rather than take down the board the company sniped it with a URL: where folks could vote on whether the original ad was offensive or not!

My opinion: I think the whole thing was contrived to create buzz for the spa. The new paradigm suggests we don’t apologize for controversy but do it more.

Special note: This post will be part of my presentation to fepe: International Federation of Outdoor Advertising in Madrid.

Conventional wisdom suggests we ignore what’s written in the tabloids. So, I’m not going to…

He didn’t respond so it must be true!

I still haven’t read the comments on Agency Spy’s “story” about me leaving my job at Euro RSCG Chicago. But then a visitor to my own blog (by the name JT) had to go and sum them up for me! Thanks JT. I guess. His full assessment is posted in the comments of my last post. Look, I believe JT was trying to do the right thing. He seems to have put a lot of effort into his “two cents.” While I was not planning on rebuttal, here are my responses to the three primary criticisms levied at me –chronicled on Agency spy and summed up by JT:

1. “Steffan- you’re always pimping Altoids.” The last time I wrote or spoke about Altoids was last year, in a speech for the Outdoor Association of Puerto Rico in San Juan. It wasn’t the primary focus of the material but they had asked me to work it in. Other than that, I don’t recall any recent communications I’ve done regarding Altoids. Tell you what. Search my blog or twitter feed. If you find something vainglorious promoting Altoids send me the link and I’ll publish it with my humblest apologies. Here’s a promise: If everyone else stops talking about Altoids and me the conversation dies. Your call everyone else.

2. “Steffan- you’re always promoting your books and blogs.” I link my blogs to my facebook and Twitter account. Doesn’t everyone? If not, why not? It’s called connectivity. When I write a post it sends the link to both. In addition, within 48 hours of creating new material on my blog I’ll probably tweet it 2 or 3 times, so as to share the link with friends and followers. My favorite bloggers do the same. I try to write three new posts a week. Do the math. Seems like normal behavior to me. Otherwise, I tweet about the same silly shit you do: “Bears suck!” “Go Bears!” BTW, one of my blogs, The Rogue's Gallery is a showcase for OTHER people. Not me. The other blog, Sweet by Design gives away my latest book coupled with a contest to design its eventual paper cover and win an iPad. In none of my blogs do I make any money or try to.

3. “Steffan- you criticize other people’s work but what have you done.” Here I might be culpable. Though I mostly write about tendencies in modern marketing from time to time I do select certain campaigns and talk about them. I believe praising Allstate’s “Mayhem” campaign is the most recent example. (Full disclosure: I am working on a story about another campaign, which I will share soon.) As for personal accomplishments (or lack thereof), I stand behind what’s on our website. I also think our campaign for Valspar paint was some of the best work I’ve ever had a hand in. Still, one of the things I’m most proud of from my last job was helping to build a good, decent agency from some pretty damaged material. We became viable and competitive, a real team. That we survived the crippling recession with minimal job losses is pleasant proof we did something right. Alas, I cannot put that in my “portfolio.” It was a mortgage on my creative reputation that I was willing to make. I’d do it again.

As I’ve already acknowledged, being part of the so-called “conversation” sometimes means getting your ass handed to you. Of course I get upset at the shit people say about each other and me. But I try not to contribute to any death spirals and I most certainly do not comment anonymously. In the end, I’m forever learning, just like everyone else! So, thank you JT and anyone else who cares to read and write on my behalf. Even the haters. It’s an honor.

On being creative amidst followers and haters.

My office: Me, Bo and the Internet

Last year at this time I wrote about Martin Luther King’s inspiring Letters from a Birmingham Jail. It’s an amazing piece of writing (his not mine) and on this day, when we celebrate what would have been his 82nd birthday, I urge you to read it or his famous “I have a Dream” speech. Despite all evil in the world, we are better because Dr. King was in it.

But it made me think…the line between hater and follower is razor thin isn’t it? Look at the craziness surrounding the tragedy in Tucson. Gun sights on Palin’s blog! Dark postings from the shooter! The finger pointing online is as reckless and hate-filled as that assassin’s gun. Yet, however uncivil, it is the “conversation” we are having. It is representative of how we think and feel. Therefore it is valid.

That is the blessing and curse of social media. As a writer and creative professional, it is the reality I chose to embrace, as much from necessity as desire. To do our job, one needs to be versed in the good, the bad and the ugly of the Internet. And that includes vitriolic blogs. When I left my job last week the trade tabloid, Agency Spy posted about it. As of this writing it has engendered over 60 comments, which I have not read. Needless to say, I’m guessing they are not voting me into the Advertising Hall of Fame. Sometimes being part of the so-called conversation means getting your ass handed to you.

Popular culture is vulgar and wonderful at the same time. (Have you played Left 4 Dead?) Advertising has always been a reflection of that. In turn our creative ideas shape popular culture, taking it in wonderful and vulgar directions. Often simultaneously. As we move from mass media into more personal territory, the distinction between what is inspired and what is cruel, stupid and downright creepy blurs even further. Last year, Diesel won a Grand Prix in Cannes for its Be Stupid campaign from Anomaly of New York, work that championed bad behavior in the name of self expression. I found the ads vulgar and wonderful at the same time. Didn’t you? Is that, then, the current definition of brilliant? It was rewarded as such.

I rest my case.

Such questions are a cornerstone of this blog. And I hope it is with this same inquisitiveness that I create and/or look at work, deciding what to make and how far to push it.

Ideas begin crude. Refining them is our craft. Lately, however, the refining process has altered. Instead of polishing words and pictures we keep in some of the crude. We think it honest. In this way our craft is reflecting a self-disclosing popular culture. Crude is real. It also happens to be promotional (Whopper Sacrifice) and direct (Be Stupid). Ironic for all our digital savvy how blunt we’ve become…again. Fifty years ago we said let the buyer beware. Now we say let the consumer decide. I say what’s the difference? What goes around comes around, right? Damn right it does.