The current legal battle between Viacom and Google/YouTube is going to have significant ramifications beyond today’s headlines.  It’s getting surprisingly little play amongst much of the social media digerati, but it’s something we all need to be aware of.

The lawsuit and the proceedings around it are truly a sign of the times.  It’s a direct outgrowth of what we’ve been emerging via the internet over the past several years.  Sites such as YouTube have essentially become free communicative vehicles to not only view, but  share and alter video productions of all types.  The concept of “share” is important because most of us use it.  But in reality, it is a nice way of saying “distribute”.  And from distribute comes distribution - a fundamental with tremendous legal ramifications.

Alter is a tough one too.  The “mash-ups” that many in social media and digital marketing talk of enthusiastically can be as problematic.  As, I guess, it should be.  At least in some cases.  An artist creates an original piece of work.  Then distributes it, usually netting some sort of financial gain.  Others take it, and now because of new tools can alter it and redistribute it.  Many times this new process leads to lost potential revenue for the original artist. Read more…

The Association of National Advertisers and Forrester Reseearch are pointing out the 62% of marketers now believe that TV advertising has become less effective over the past two years.  That’s an amazing number.  Hopefully it will serve as a clarion call to those same marketers and to the ad agencies that serve them  Sometimes I think that many marketers see the changes that are happening but choose to not adapt because they assume no one else will.  But when statistics showing more than 60% of marketers showing doubt on th most well known medium for advertising, it means that they can’t delay changes in methods and mediums.

This is a major reason why the same survey had 87% of marketers planning to spend more on web advertising this year.  Or that eMarketer is saying that ad spend should reach $28.5 billion, up 23% over last year.  That includes an 74% increase in spending on online video.

The odd thing is that the models for online video advertising are not even close to being set.  Pre-roll is a mess.  Net shows aren’t necessarily a huge success.  And we keep on hearing that people are looking to interact with their friends on social networks and not with brands.

On Monday, CBS Television Stations announced the launch of what I think will be a great step in the direction of web based mainstream and citizen generated news. They are launching the CBS Local Ad Network in which local stations will syndicate new content to local bloggers and social media sites. This news will be delivered via news widgets that will link to video and text news of the local stations.

IN exchange for hosting the widgets, the bloggers will receive a share of the local ad dollars that are sold by the station.

How is it a win-win-win-win situation?

The will extend the CBS news media brand both on a national and local level by integrating news content with local blogger with a following. While it takes some of the focus off the broadcast model, it could potentially easily be made up via web usage. The network will seem innovative while the local affiliate could develop deeper ties to the local community. Bloggers and social networkds could increase their visibility and bring in more traffic. Advertisers will get greater exposure.

I like the idea.

We’re getting some responses from our outreach effort for Firebrand. Some are impressive. Some aren’t. Some are downright funny.

Shel Holtz likes the idea a lot. He opines that it isn’t that we don’t like commercials; it’s that we don’t like their inerruptive nature. True. Especially when the commercials suck.

C.C. Chapman thinks the concept of Firebrand is cool, although he’s remaining cautious overall. But he thinks the idea of tying in past Super Bowl games to this year’s Big Game is a great strategy. C.C., being a Granite Stater living in Mass. is staying true to his New England roots and predicting a Patriot blowout. Good man!!

Joanna Pena-Bickley gives us a mention too.

Apparently Paul Chaney did exactly what Chris asked him to do…thanks Paul!!

Steve Hall of Adrants is less kind. He’s trying to gauge when the Firebrand will flicker and go out. That’s odd, because Steve is usually never cynical. A warm and fuzzy guy. ;)

Shari Leventhal, CMO of Firebrand meets Steve head on in the comments section.

And Agency Spy plain hates us. But that’s cool. We don’t know who or she is.

Read more…





Yeah, I know. You hate commercials. You hate the sudden interruption of your favorite show to see three, four, or five thirty-second poorly created hard-to-differentiate video presentations on a product you don’t like, don’t want, don’t need, or don’t use.

Me too.

You want to get back to the show, the game, the newscast. See the bad guy get his ass nailed, the final two minutes of the tight game, or news on the latest scoop on the election cycle. The last thing you want to see is a series of presentations about pills that can make you pee better, a car that supposedly makes you cool, and a law firm that chases ambulances.

Me too.

But every once and a while, you’ll watch something that will catch your eye. It will make you laugh. Chuckle inside. You’ll be able to relate to it. Or you’ll be impressed because it’s impressive, not because the commercial is trying to pretend that it’s impressive with itself. Or you’ll think, shit, how did they do that?

Me too.

If that’s what happens, then that’s a commercial that will likely end up on Firebrand.

Read more…