To clarify. I am not a big fan och campaigns where you do something crazy and brand it. Relevance and brand/product has to be centric.

While the triangle raises the bar, or rather sets the aim for the strategic process I believe that we must think one step further. What ball are through the hoop?

Traditional media builds on the premiss that all attention is good attention. In Social Marketing however everyone holds a mic. We all become a part of the conversation, we build relations and demand respect out of relations.
It’s sort of like “The Boy Who Cried Wolf” - his message got through the triangle, into the hoop until no-one would listen anymore.

What’s the value of a hit? Well, that’s a tough one.
But in a world where the effect of paid media looses its effect more and more every year we’ll have to create viral effects in everything we do.

The Bike Hero was one example and it’s as you say ha Hoax. But viral effects or hooks if you like can and are implemented on a lot more than that example. My point is not to say this is the truth behind the viral phenomena but instead a gatekeeper for brands in terms of at least validating that an idea stands a chance. How many things do actually go viral – not enought if you count the amount of ideas that comes out of agencies worlds wide.

I think we should think viral when designing a product, when drawing a house, when creating a TV show, when writing copy, when building a boat etc etc. It’s about injecting those things that makes your ‘thing’ stand out in the crowd. And that, in most cases, doesn’t have to be a hoax.

The viral triangle is for me one way of raising the bar.

And even in the cases when it’s actually valid, or smart even, to have viral as a strategic key element I think there is a need to raise the question;

What’s the value of a hit?

How does it associate to the brand? Something that is even more important in cross platform social marketing (the only good social marketing?)
And what does it promise the customer?
You bring up Droga 5 as an example;

Even though the campaign might be in key with their target group, aligned to your viral model and all that, bureaus today are so eager to call their success that the amazing bike ride or the incredible stunt for Eckö (graffiti on Air Force 1) are called for what they are, campaigns. A hoax.

The brand is basically telling the consumer that they need to fake it to make it.

I’m not saying that it’s all bad, my point is just that even if you hold the truth behind then viral phenomena (does anyone really?) These questions must be raised in this growing race for attention.

Great blog,
thanks. // C