more thoughts on tassimo’s webisodes

After posting yesterday on the webisode campaign for Tassimo by Ogilvy & Mather, I ambled over to Adrants and read Steve Hall’s take on the campaign:

It’s not funny. But Who Hired Bob does two interesting things:

1) It offers a $20 rebate on a TASSIMO hot beverage machine in exchange for your email address, and
2) It does that “choose your own adventure” thing at the end of each webisode, which we’ve already professed to like a lot.

I agree with Adrants that the webisodes aren’t funny, and that both of the points that he brings up are interesting.

The high-value coupon offer for a simple e-mail address not only helps to populate a consumer database that, if utilized properly, could be a first step to a continuity program and actual consumer conversation. Also, coupons of that sort of value have drawing power (and extendability to packaging and in-store, which could be used to drive people online). Not to mention that consumers who download a coupon have a higher propensity to actually buy the product, which is nice.

The “choose your own adventure” aspect is also a nice touch in that it adds some interest to otherwise dry webisodes. Anything that gives consumers the opportunity to engage is interesting.

Despite both points of interest, this program still falls flat because of the lack of awareness-driving tactics that tell consumers that this content exists online and gives them a reason to view it. As commenter Toad says, the idea that consumers will just be flipping around the internet and find the content just isn’t realistic.

Commenter mpaige hits the nail on the head by saying that “the content needs to be produced and THEN (ironically) you need run TV ads to get the word out about it the show…TV commercials are still a critically important way to reach people.” They, and other awareness tactics are critical when you want people to find your brand in the vast information dump that is the internet. They need to know it is there, need a reason to go, and need clear direction how to get there.

Also, it helps if the content that awaits is engaging and relevant.

The primary issue right now, though, is that it is content just floating in the internet space with nothing to drive consumers to find it. And they won’t find it on their own.

if you (just) post it, they will (not) come

During my morning perusal of AdPulp, I came across the news of Ogilvy’s new advertising pitch for Tassimo coffee makers…which is going to consist of webisodes and a consumer-generated contest:

“Creating original, entertaining content gives Tassimo both cultural currency and permission for further conversations with consumers,” said Joseph Frydl, director of Ogilvy’s branded content and entertainment group. “Purely interruptive marketing simply cannot accomplish that.”

Beyond the fact that these webisodes, which has acting and production values that make it look like something that ran on my high school’s internal television channel, just aren’t original or entertaining, the idea that some webisodes, a website and a promotional overlay will start conversations with consumers is simply wishful thinking of the sort that somehow seems to convince clients, but reasonable people know are just empty words.

Even if we assume that the creative execution and promotion are relevant and compelling to the target, how, exactly, is said target supposed to hear about all of this online content? “If you post it (on YouTube), they will come” just doesn’t hold water, as the 49 total views that the video has gotten in its five days of being posted on YouTube show.

That “interruptive marketing” that gets derided in the press release is critical to telling consumers why they should go online and search out a specific piece of content. There is so much content online, and there are now so many brands who are doing the “webisodes and consumer generated contest,” that consumers need a compelling reason to get involved.

Tassimo not only hasn’t give them a reason, it doesn’t seem like they even think that building awareness is even worth their time. That is a bad move.

And this is a bad, unoriginal and poorly-produced idea.