From this week’s Marketing Week:
Conservative frontbench MPs are being forced to distance themselves from rebel Tory backbenchers who have commissioned an online viral campaign that uses real mobile phone video footage of drunkenness and “happy slapping” in a bid to encourage young people to vote Conservative in the forthcoming General Election … Asa Bailey, founder of his eponymous firm, says: “Conservative backbench MPs commissioned the campaign, but I cannot identify them.”
Not a good start. But things get worse when you go to the YouTube channel that has been created. Scroll down to the Wales Tourist Board Special film, and watch out particularly for the caption four seconds from the end.
Not perhaps the most enlightened of views about Welsh women to choose to highlight on your video log?
UPDATE: As Tim Ireland pointed out in the comments, the www.voteforchange.org.uk site linked to from the YouTube page previously used the Conservative Party logo, though it has now gone from it. Tim’s blog has more details.
Share:
17 Comments
Your second link is broken.
Ta.
Having now gone through the channel, I’m intrigued. Because at the end of the day, if it really does get young people voting, maybe it has something going for it? And 124,000 viewings in three days is more than anything I’ve seen any other party political ad on YouTube get.
What I don’t get though is how this is in any way an effective message given their target demographic? Are there hundreds of thousands of 18-24 year olds out there outraged at the level of drinking related offences? Or will they just think that this is a funny video and be grateful to the Labour Party who the Tories assure us made it possible? Videos like this go viral because they appeal to the worst instincts – slapping a tutting political message at the end doesn’t somehow make it virtuous. Nor can I see how it can get you votes.
The bottom line is, it is ultimately relatively easy to run a viral marketing campaign. The tricky thing is being able to combine it with a resonating political message. I get the feeling the Tories seem to think the latter is only incidental, in which case let them waste their money.
And how do you get so many viewings? You flag your video as a reponse to a video with half a million viewings and use the keywords: sexy, dancer, teen, drugs, girl, viral, video, lap, pole, strip, drunk, fall, funny.
Also interesting that the Marketing Week article says “The two virals are the first in a series of films that… will be supported by a television ad campaign in the North of England once a General Election has been called.” One assumes MW’s source is the agency who is doing the work (and protecting the ‘backbench Tory MPs’ names).
So that would be Conservative MPs fighting an independent General Election campaign on the airwaves unauthorised by CCHQ.
Or it would be if policial parties are allowed to put adverts on TV – except for PPBs, we’re not…
5 – Two serious criminal offences there for starters, under the PPERA and the RPA, not to mention infringement of copyright for the song on one of the other videos.
The old adage is still true, ‘Sex Sells,’ hence over 100k views. Although as James rightly points out, I don’t think it will get the Tories very far.
“Conservative backbench MPs commissioned the campaign, but I cannot identify them.”
I have reason to doubt this statement. Asa Bailey has past form in making speculative ‘viral’ items. The first video released saw its Conservative logo removed pretty sharpish, too:
http://www.bloggerheads.com/archives/2007/08/yo_kids_this_is.asp
Regardless of all of that, it’s not very sensitive to the target market…. a staged argument on YouTube is unlikely to be welcomed with open arms.
I’ve just asked them whether they’re censoring the comments – just after they appeared to have censored one – and now I’ve put up the Tory Arms Dealer stuff written up for da kidz and I’m waiting … and waiting … and waiting …
Ha – managed to get a medium sized comment up now. No paras. No URLs and shorter than the box length.
How long will it stay up.
The anti BNP thing in the middle is from a guy who utterly condemned the Tories FOR THIS CHANNEL.
About to blog about that.
Relax, Chris. This is a commercial newcomer blundering in to a new and alien world, and that’s all.
It’s worth watching to see what he gets away with and/or what people will stand for. Me, personally, I can’t wait to see the reaction to the ‘funded secretly by backbenchers’ claim.
If I was to add a video to YouTube in support of the local party’s campaigns, would I need to add an imprint? And, if so, how does it need to be written?
I defer to Tim’s better knowledge about Asa Bailey, but one thing I think should pointed out is that there is nothing illegal about someone setting up a pro-Conservative campaign for the next general election, so long as it abided by existing ‘third party’ legislation under the PPERA 2000. Indeed, the trend of the last two elections has been that spending in these has increased significantly (mostly trade unions and pro-hunting organisations). One of the better reasons for being careful about restricting funding for political parties is that if this is done poorly then rich donors will simply end up donating to ‘independent’ pro-party campaigns, as has become the norm in the US (so called ‘soft money’).
Whether Bailey knows about any of this is another matter.
Stuart: It’s not entirely clear whether it’s necessary, but you can’t go wrong by adding an imprint. In videos in Bristol during the locals, we just treated them like leaflets – see the imprint at the beginning and end (probably overkill) on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3Nug1LGRto
Thanks Greg. I appreciate the advice.
The party puts imprints on its centrally-produced videos. I’d recommend doing the same for local party videos.
Wow, another comments thread where Chris Paul is talking about a totally different subject to everybody else.
Anyway, what I want to know is, who is going to do the pole-dancing in the Lib Dem version of the ad? Will or Mark?