If you trawl through some of the video-hosting sites out there, you'll start to notice some ‘made for video-hosting site' ads. The brands behind these ads seem to be taking advantage of a rich content medium which does not demand high end production (‘TV ads' without the big directors or titanic-sequel crews).
But they should tread with caution.
Most of these ads (and I am not referring to the phenomenon of already popular TV ads getting encores on the web, which just further proves the rule about content) out there seem to have entered this new media space with a lukewarm concept with low-end production, hoping to get some kind of exposure without too much financial risk or use of grey matter. The point these brands are missing is that video-hosting sites (and pretty much the new web) inherently rejects mediocre concepts/content.
It's apparent that certain brands have latched onto this medium with an old brand mindset (ok concept, ok production) but they don't end up getting the holy grail of the new web – i.e. prolific exposure on a very progressive medium.
A possible reason for this bungling is that these guys are hoping to get away with the lack of accountability which prevailed in the age broadcast media. Here I am referring to the tradition of a marketing department convincing each other that they had made a great ad and, with very sluggish ways of judging efficacy, not being proved wrong. This approach clearly does not wash in a new media space.
Part of why old media produces great concepts year in and year out is that creatives know the risk of a flop in an environment where production and media space comes at a premium
The new breed of citizen directors seem to think that a bit of physical comedy will create a viral effect and the brand slapped on the end will get famous in the process. The old media rules still apply in that concepts still need to be compelling and be an effective conduit for a brand message.
Some of the hosting sites (especially some of the local YouTube wannabes) themselves fuel the fire and clearly earn revenue out these poor brands. This is evident when the ad is placed under a category titled ‘humour', when they should be under ‘weak brand plugs'. These sites can help bump up popularity of these ads but they should already know that the wisdom of crowds will always triumph on the new web.
There is, however, a rich new opportunity space as these sites also inherently embrace clever concepts – no matter how cheaply produced (in fact the low-end nature of the production is often linked to the concept). So brands can effectively cut out production and media flighting costs and still get their hands on the holy grail of the new web – i.e. prolific exposure on a very progressive medium. But the rub is that they can't show up until they have an ad which plays by the new rule of engagement: great content wins.
