About the CyberLions awarded at the last Cannes festival.

The three Grand Prizes are, in my opinion, very relevant: they cover the three pillars of the interactive agencies' services.

1: the rumor

The first Grand Prize went to The best job in the World by Australia's Cumminsnitro. You've most probably heard of it, the idea was to offer a dream job. The lucky winner became the warden of an island in the Queensland archipelago. Minimum responsibilities, great pay. Yes there was a site to post application videos but this project had great buzz offline. The client was the local tourism agency.



First pillar: being able to generate a rumor. A simple, highly sharable idea (the virus), insemination to launch the campaign (from traditional ads to social media) and management of the conversation (follow-ups, stats, reajustments).

2: product amelioration

The second Grand Prize went to AKQA London for Fiat's Eco:drive. Essentially it's the release of apps to enhance your Fiat driving experience. An USB key lets you put your car's driving data in the website. Tutorials are then launched to explain how to reduce your gas consumption, shows the money you've saved, etc. The experience is completed by a Fiat driver community.



Second pillar: product amelioration. Market analysis (measure, online surveys, technological watch, social and marketing) and product modification (optimized website, complementary applications, technological enhancement of an existing product).

3: transmedia

The third Grand Prize was awarded to 42 Entertainment for the Why so serious? ARG they created to promote the new Batman movie. A viral campaign that spilled into reality, cell phone activities, flash mobs and surprise cakes, No less tahn 31 sites supported the experience.



Third pillar: transmedia narration. Channel architecture (paid messages, mobility, social media, events), conception of the tales in tree structures (user variable, experience variable, technological variable), management of the public's implication (follow-ups, measure, ajustments).

An ARG (augmented reality game) has just been analyzed by the fine people at Video Games Republic, a site that specializes in video games on all platforms.

The player looks at a map through a phone equipped with a camera. He sees a city in 3D and zombies that are just asking to get killed. Watch this video to get a clearer mental picture.



If you put Skittles™ on the board, they turn into massive zombie damage inducing bombs. Usually I'm not too keen on product placement, but I have to admit this one is pretty cool. The user places the product, it is not sprung on him. Smart & sexy.

[Translated from a post by Martin Ouellette]

I few weeks ago, I blogged about the characteristics a new product name must have. I insisted on the fact that a brand also becomes a tag for search engines like Google. Consequently, I think new names are better than appropriations.

In the comments made about that post, some people worried about the creation of abstract, even absurd names.

Let me share a secret: all our clients are part of our R&D, whether they know so or want to, or not.



Here are the first results of this new approach. We created 'Zoofest'. It isn't abstract, but it is a word made of two existing ones. It already 'made sense'.

'Zoofest' existed on the Web already, it's the name of an event for children in a San Francisco zoo. We decided to use the name anyway, both because the lawyers gave it the thumbs up and because of our regional intuition.

So with its pre-made sense and its relative originality, look at these results on Google.ca - the name was launched on June 9th.

On Google.com (you have to force it if you're in Canada), our Zoofest doesn't do too bad.

Being on the first result page and having a simple URL (zoofest.ca) has its advantages.

Maybe a unique word would have been better.

[Translated from a post by Martin Ouellette]

My first mandate as an advertising creative, 20 years ago, was to find a name for a new insurance program. I tried to find something that was meaningful, that had strong inferences. It was a supple program that was adaptable to any situation. After flirting with 'impro', I suggested 'Jazz'. Yes, it's scary. But it was the eighties and I was a junior.

Later, because of experience or because of exhaustion, I became the champion of names with no connotation. Like 'Kodak', said to be the first brand with a name that had no sense.



In that case, the idea was to find a name that would be pronounced more or less the same way in any language (pretty relevant for products meant for tourists). I thought it was more simple (meaning less expensive) to inject sense rather that 'hijack' sense: than it was better to invent a word that to try to redefine one. But there was always somebody - usually a very pragmatic somebody - who wanted to surf on preexisting sense. Usually, that situation resulted in the pitch of 2 suggestions.

Today, another element enters the equation: the tag (or keyword if you like). These days, we recommend unique words to our clients so they can benefit from the tag effect. Google 'jazz', you'll find 4 million results. It's not the case with 'Sid Lee'. And all those results are relevant.

Also, a name shouldn't be too close to another one. You want to use 'Jaz' and you think you're quite awesome, sticking it to the man like that. Sorry. Google will pull up 'Jay-z' and 'Jazz". Search engines just don't like void.

So a new name that looks as little as possible like another one, plus a bit of effort to be recognized by Google. 'Provokat' is pretty unique and generates good results even if it's common in Germany and Indonesia. That's because Google has picked us up for 7 years now and because we know what we're doing.

Calling your new product 'Happle' isn't a good idea even if the lawyers give you a green light.

[Translated from a post by Martin Ouellette]

What do 100 2.0 marketing people and breast cancer have in common?

A book, this one.



Profits from the sale of Connect: Marketing in The Social Media era will go to this cause thanks to Susan G. Komen.

I wrote a chapter. The limit for each contribution was 400 words. I wrote 300 under the title "Marketing with social norms in mind".

I think it's interesting.

To find out more, read the blog or join the fans on facebook. Oh, and get your copieshere.

[Translated from a post by Martin Ouellette]

The values we associate with 2.0 are also those we attribute to mothers: conversation, discussion, inclusion, openness, welcoming, sharing. In fact, it's anything opposite to interruption, domination, hierarchy, closedmindedness, ego, men, fathers.

A majority of our clients are women. Maybe women are better at integrating this new relationnal world?



Rwanda is a fascinating country. It has the first parliament in history to have a a majority of women reprensentatives. Thus, it's not surprising that the parliament is putting forth a major offensive to promote Rwanda's digital culture.

Next time you devise plans to make a marketing offensive against a target market, based on a road block, a blitz and infiltrating groups, ask yourself if you mother would approve.

[Translated from a post by Martin Ouellette]

Sprint launched a brilliant ad page.

A collection of Widgets that translates in relatively real time a huge quantity of info to show the strength of the here and now. The key that keeps you logged on Sprint wireless is thus justified. Yearly data collection in a second, real numbers live, an sauve voice giving the importance of the present and other gizmos hold it all together.



Speaking of Widgets, Radio-Canada (French CBC) just launched a new one, that helps you follow the news. We helped out on the design but the credit goes to Bloom and the SRC team.

There are many ways to articulate a campaign that on many media outlets.

You can see integrated communications as a series of copy/pastes. A bad and inadequate reproduction of a TV spot (for example) on all the outlets. Boring, and most probably not very efficient. To reduce production for different outlets to pale copies of a central media is often a bad business idea. All you can get from that, at best, is frequency.

An other way to do it is a bit more up to date. Each media has a component of the brand, of the promise. The TV ad says Fall. On the Web, you live through a tree's change. On the radio you hear about the scrunching sound fallen leaves make. If you see one part or all, the story told is different, but always coherent. The idea is to use different medias for their different potential.


Here are different executions of the same concept, adapted to the media.

Let's now talk about a campaign that uses different ways to get to the same destination. The "Save your Sensible" campaign for Spring Valley juices created by GP Y&R Melbourne.

To sell healthy fruit drinks to young people, the campaign tries to associate responsible choices and coolness. The star of the concept is an ugly naked little monster called a Sensible.

OnTV, the little monster helps you make good life choices. Drink juice instead of alcohol so you don't wake up to a bad surprise the next morning. Two 30-second spots, one for each genre show the monster and give the address SaveYourSensible.com at the end. TV is narrative.

On print, the monster isn't as cute as on TV. The URL is still there of course.

If you've seen the TV ad and you see the print, you smile. If not, that monster doesn't make a lot of sense. On one hand SaveYourSensible is an invitation to personnalize, on the other had it's an invitation to understand.

One of thebanners also uses the monster, in a playful way.

The website npresents the concept in a movie. Then you can find your own little animal : it's in a box with your name on it. Your own little monster you can hit, poke, and that you give juice to to make it happy. The game is to bully it and then console it with juice.

To keep your Sensible, the site offers to give it a home on Facebook. There your friends are told how he's doing. That's how the viral potential comes in.

No matter where you came from, TV, street, somewhere online, you end up on the website. It's an often seen use of the media, but here you're brought into a community. You go from controlled media to open media. From bought media to friend recommendations.

This campaign that goes from convergence to divergence is strong and rare. We don't see many of those in our market, probably because of a lack of money, culture, vision or opportunity. Good thing Cossette sometimes manages to hit close to that.

[Translated from a post by Martin Ouellette]

The first frame of a banner on src.ca really surprised me. I even laughed.



It's a promotion created by Fjord for les dessous de C.A., presented by the Chevrolet Aveo.

Did the French CBC grow balls all of a sudden? Or maybe I' getting old and easily surprised? Or is the Web more intimate than mass media so ads can push the envelope a little further?

When I was little and worked in traditionnal advertising, the Great Censor at SRC told me that shows could be more vulgar than ads because ads were not chosen content. So... banners aren't interruptive anymore?

Joking aside though, I'm happy times are changing.

[Translated from a post by Martin Ouellette]

We've often said it here: advertising often tend to be idiotically hyper-positive.

And just as often, we have praised honnesty and having a real conversation with citizens/consumers/users.



But sometimes, when you give the mic to everyone, well something gets the lol ball rolling and people start being much worse than any ad would have dared to be. Read this endorsement of an ebay seller. Or these crazy comments about a shirt with a wolf on it.

I like that people don't always take this economy/conversation too seriously.

[Translated from a post by Martin Ouellette]

I've just come back from a week spent in Cannes for the Advertising festival. It was a gift from Sympatico MSN for winning the Grand Prize at the Boomerang Gala last December. The team was nice enough to send me.

I didn't bring my phone or my laptop. I wanted this week to be "unlogged". I took notes the old fashion way, in a notebook, and here are a few of my thoughts, slightly revised.


First, let it be known that it was my first time in Cannes. After [soon to be] 20 years in advertising, I had to go, given the chance. So I was, like they say over there, a "Cannes virgin".