A new Sauza Tequila video that’s encouraging women to “Make It With a Fireman” is generating viral heat. The video’s real point is to get women to make a margarita recipe featuring Sauza Blue Tequila, as demonstrated by a hunky “fireman.” (Actually, a hunky model playing a fireman, but the desired effect is the same.) In the 10 days since its YouTube posting on April 16, the video has pulled an impressive 656,000 views, and 1,250 likes (to 17 dislikes). Much of the two-minute video is devoted to the fireman gazing intently at the viewer as he riffs about what he does (while doffing his fireman’s coat to better reveal his T-shirt-clad, toned physique). “Being a fireman is about more than just putting out blazes and giving kittens CPR,” he confides in a soulful yet suggestive voice. “Sometimes my duty demands that I fan the flames…like when a call comes in from a lady who needs immediate assistance. Maybe she needs help with a computer thing. Maybe she wants to go antiquing. Could be as simple as understanding that walking in heels is hard…or that reliving that summer in Paris is easy…” (He speaks the last phrase in French; an English subtitle is provided.) Or…“Maybe it’s ladies’ night in, and she wants a simple, delicious recipe for margaritas, with a twist.” Following his demonstration of that recipe, he adds: “Yes, that’s what I’m trained for…whether it’s to help her choose leggings or pants, telling her that leggings are pants, or discussing leggings and jeggings versus pant-pegging at her next ladies’ night in, I’ll come to the rescue. Don’t call me a hero…just call me.” Obviously, the video -- from Sauza agency Euro RSCG Chicago -- is highly tongue-in-cheek, and that tone is heightened by a prominent cameo role by an adorable kitten (“kittens make everything better”), as well as a bluesy background instrumental that wouldn’t be out of place in a strip club. “At its core, this campaign is about delivering convenient recipes for fresh Sauza margaritas to women,” says Sauza Tequila brand manager Amanda Lamb. “The fireman is the hook that gives our target a reason to watch and the recipe a reason to stay.” (The specific target is women 25 to 39.) Sauza is fanning the viral flames with banner ads on targeted sites (such as Allrecipes.com, YouTube and multiple pages on Yahoo, including targeted log-in pages); spotlighting the video on its own newly redesigned site (which offers ample recipes and entertainment tips); and generating buzz through key women’s blogger sites and media/public relations efforts. Downloadable coupons are being offered through the brand’s site, Facebook page and other channels, and marketing/promotional activity will be stepped-up around Cinco de Mayo. In addition, the Beam, Inc. brand has launched a Sauza Tequila Spa Getaway Sweepstakes on its Facebook page (which currently has about 133,000 “likes”), and its branded tour bus is now making stops around the country. Might some women be offended by the stereotypes being blatantly played-upon in this video? Of course. However, as Huffington Post associate editor Emma Gray points out, the stereotypes (“Women like men in uniform! Women like kittens! Women have tech issues they can’t handle themselves! Women chatter endlessly about jeggings and whether they are pants!) are “exaggerated enough [in this video] that it makes fun of those clichés more than it reinforces them.” On YouTube, the video has thus far generated 1,250 likes to 17 dislikes. One sample comment: “Get this commercial on TV! Best marketing I’ve ever seen.” Another: “Honestly, this is how you should be attempting to sell me everything from now on. Life insurance, feminine hygiene products, beer, fast food, anything really. Show me the kitten-toting, drink-mixing, French-speaking fireman, and I’ll show you the dough.” As to whether some real firemen might object to the video as being misleading and/or demeaning in regard to the true, extremely dangerous nature of their jobs (despite the flattering, macho-yet-sensitive image of firemen portrayed), so far, if they exist, it’s hard to find such comments on YouTube or through general Web searches.
Car-service company GroundLink is looking to build national awareness by appealing to the secret agent that lives within every person who might use its service. “We all have a secret agent on the inside,” Seth Lasser, chief marketing officer of GroundLink, tells Marketing Daily. “That’s who we’re trying to appeal to.” Two videos, which are currently online and will begin appearing on media in local markets this summer, introduce Dan, “a financial planner, devoted husband, father and part-time secret agent for the federal government.” The first 90-second video (which has also been cut down into a television -- and Internet -- video-friendly 30-second clip) shows Dan getting dropped off at his office, entering a GroundLink car and jetting off to exotic locales to fight crime (while also consulting with clients about financial issues). The video also shows him using the company’s mobile app to order a car and track its progress, so he can escape a hail of bullets into a GroundLink car. A second video, which will live online only, further explores Dan’s secret agent side. In the piece, three burly men abduct Dan into a windowless van. Saying one of his partners gave him up, the villains reveal their plans to dump him in the desert, surrounded by “a few hundred miles of unforgiving terrain.” During their monologue, Dan surreptitiously uses his phone to summon a car to meet him at the distant locale. When it does, the bad guys are only left to mutter, “Who the f--- is GroundLink?” The approach, which Lasser describes as “bold, savvy and a little witty,” is meant to bring some excitement and a memorable hook to a category that doesn’t have much traction in consumers’ minds, he says. “We’re trying to create a brand in a large industry [where] there haven’t been strong brands,” he says. “When you communicate a car service, it can fall flat.” In addition to running online and in local spot markets, the company plans on running the ads on the Captivate Network in elevators and they will “live in the social sphere,” Lasser says, teasing them on Facebook and Twitter.
Web giant Yahoo took the lid off a new slate of video programming during its Digital Content NewFront presentation in New York on Wednesday. The unveiling of a new show featuring Katie Couric -- as well as an animated Sci-Fi series produced by Tom Hanks -- headlined the event, which was designed to be a content showcase for advertisers and press similar to a network television upfront. The new Katie Couric series, called “Katie’s Take,” will be a weekly program devoted to health and lifestyle issues. It is being launched in partnership with ABC News, for which Couric currently serves as a special correspondent. Yahoo and ABC had entered into a content-sharing partnership last year. Among the other new Yahoo video initiatives announced Wednesday were “Electric City,” an animated Sci-Fi series produced by actor/filmmaker Tom Hanks, “Cybergeddon,” a digital film about cybercrime from "CSI" creator Anthony Zuiker, “Dancing with Myself,” a musical comedy developed by the creators of the Broadway hit “Rock of Ages,” a new series aimed at men called “Stunt Nation,” and a new talk show with actor Jeff Goldblum. The new programs will be added to Yahoo's existing video portfolio, which includes 15 original video production partners, 40+ original series, and more than 300 original episodes per month. Unlike competitor AOL -- which yesterday announced a new portal that assembles its video content at a single destination -- Yahoo wants its video programming to be consumed mainly in the context of the vertical destinations in which they appear, such as Yahoo Sports, Yahoo Finance, and Yahoo News etc. That said, Yahoo also has a premium video destination called Yahoo Screen, where the new video programs will be accessible, but the aggregated approach is not a main focus of its video strategy, in the same way it is for AOL. Commenting on Yahoo’s video strategy, Mickie Rosen, SVP, Yahoo Media Network, said: "We're bringing celebrated storytellers and sophisticated production capabilities to provide our audience with the types of immersive experiences they're seeking more of on the Web."
In today's VideoDaily Roundup, we keep tabs on the latest developments from the Senate Commerce Committee hearing on online video innovation. Akamai’s longtime CEO, who led the company through a period of incredible growth, steps down. The New York Times' David Carr uses a few anecdotes to assess Netflix's slide, and finally: why life is so good at high-flying Ooyala. Digital Execs Urge Senate Committee to Keep the Web Open The AP reports from the front lines of the Senate Commerce Committee hearing on online video innovation, saying that the group of digital media execs called on to educate the committee on the issue believe that tremendous growth in online video will continue for years to come -- provided that broadband Internet access is made widely available to all Americans. Microsoft's Vice President for Media and Entertainment, Blair Westlake, said that universal access to high-speed broadband was "the single most important issue shaping the future of video." He predicted there would be more change in the next 18 months than had occurred in the past five years. Paul Misener, vice president for global public policy at online retailer Amazon.com, agreed that tremendous growth for digital video would continue, but "this assumes the Internet will remain a non-discriminatory, open platform." He warned against ISPs and mobile carriers imposing "immutable or unrealistically priced" ceilings on how much data subscribers are able to download. Barry Diller, the former TV and movie studio boss who is now chairman of IAC/InterActive Corp, also urged Congress to ensure that “the rules of the game favor entry and innovation"-- not the financial interests of "incumbents" like cable, telephone and satellite providers. Akamai CEO Steps Down Akamai, which operates a content delivery network that helps businesses deliver data faster online, announced during its Q1 earnings report that CEO Paul Sagan would step down by the end of 2013. Sagan has been CEO since 2005, during which time the company’s sales more than quadrupled -- hitting $1.16 billion in 2011, up from $283.1 million in 2005. As Bloomberg BusinessWeek reports, Sagan helped the company become less dependent on the commoditized content delivery business by acquiring its way into areas such as cloud computing. Analysts said Akamai would likely replace Sagan with someone with a corporate sales background who has worked in hardware or software. The company said the search for a replacement would begin immediately. No End in Sight for Netflix’s Woes In the wake of last summer's “ill-conceived” pricing plan that put Netflix's stock into free fall, CEO Reed Hastings said it could take three years for the company to recover. “He is turning out to be more than correct,” New York Times columnist David Carr says. Indeed, in its Q1 earnings report, Netflix lost $4.6 million --its first loss in seven years -- and said its international expansion would be delayed. The stock promptly fell 14 percent. Like so many other subscribers, Carr downgraded to Netflix's streaming product when given the option, which means he went from paying $25.99 per month to just $7.99. But the barrier to entry in the streaming business is low and the competition is high -- a matter of concern for the company. As Carr says, “I have lots of streaming products on my television, including Hulu Plus and Apple TV -- and, of course, there's the whole backlog on my DVR. I’m not short on viewing options, I’m short on time. Netflix has become just one more player in the gunfight for my attention.” Ooyala Chief Sees Ample Opportunity Amid Online Video Growth FierceOnlineVideo has an interview with Ooyala CEO Jay Fulcher, following the online video platform's announcement last week of a new technology that delivers personalized content recommendations to consumers throughout Ooyala’s network on any device. The technology uses data collected from Ooyala's 200 million monthly viewers across its network of publishers that use its video platform. "We've been focused on analytics since we launched," Fulcher said. "But this takes it a step further, and it sets us apart from other companies." Fulcher added that online video has reached an inflection point: "[Online video is] transforming, " he said. "Publishers and content creators increasingly are looking for ways to get content directly to consumers, creating new options for monetization." As Editor Jim O’Neill notes, the biggest threat to Ooyala and competitors like Brightcove and KIT Digital is do-it-yourself solutions that publishers and distributors have built in-house. "Content owners tend to retreat to things they know best -- their content, for example,” Fulcher said. “The challenge in our industry is convincing them that we can do a better job than they can with that content. And that they should concentrate on what they know best."
Happy Friday, folks! Today's VideoDaily Roundup starts with a skeptical take on video's Digital Content NewFronts. Next, reports claim that a major investor is preparing to offload its Hulu stake for $200 million. Next up are several reasons why it's too soon to write off Netflix -- and finally, TubeMogul beats the RTV video drum. Wieser: NewFronts Notwithstanding, Digital Video Still a Drop in TV’s Bucket Amid all the hoopla surrounding this week’s Digital Content NewFronts, sometimes it takes a sobering perspective to bring us back down to earth. In his weekly Online Spin column, Dave Morgan -- who sold behavioral targeting pioneer Tacoda to AOL in 2007 -- points to a number of observations by Brian Wieser of Pivotal Research about the TV and video markets this year. For starters, Wieser believes that TV will have a strong upfront, despite all the concerns over shrinking audiences and attention spans, because alternatives to big TV ad buys (including cable) are still some time away. This is mostly because buyers, who depend on TV’s scale and ease of use, don’t have anywhere else to turn to. Moreover, Web video isn’t big enough -- or growing fast enough -- to matter to them, Wieser says: at under $2 billion last year, online video is less than 2 percent of TV spending. And when you look past the numbers of Hulu and Google’s YouTube, which combined account for nearly 40 percent of the online video ad market, the rest of the industry only grew 10 to 20 percent last year. In other words, Wieser doesn’t expect the digital video spending to realistically dent TV’s advertising hegemony anytime soon. Providence Equity to Sell Hulu Stake at $2 Billion ValuationBloomberg reports that Hulu stakeholder Providence Equity Partners, which owns 10 percent of the joint video venture, is preparing to sell its stake to principal owners News Corp, Comcast Corp, and Walt Disney Co for $200 million. This is a price that values the company at $2 billion, according to unnamed insiders, who added that Providence originally invested $100 million when Hulu launched in 2007, and that the media company owners will also allow Hulu employees --including CEO Jason Kilar -- to sell some shares. Both Hulu and Providence Equity declined to comment on the story. Don't Count Netflix Out- Yet Netflix can still win, says paidcontent.org.'s Daniel Frankel -- but after this week's 15 percent slide, he warns that investors have finally woken up to Netflix's limited earnings potential. The company faces all kinds of competition in the streaming entertainment business: Hulu Plus, Amazon Prime, HBO Go, Verizon, Redbox's forthcoming streaming service, and various other TV Everywhere offerings. But investors may have overreacted, too, Frankel says. For starters, Netflix has an early lead as the most proliferated over-the-top programming provider. From apps on Xboxes and Wiis to smart TVs that come with remote control featuring dedicated Netflix buttons, the company is on every screen, it seems. Frankel adds that Latin America expansion is a huge opportunity, and even though it has been delayed, it will be worth the effort, because Netflix will be the first streaming service to market there. Frankel also points out that the content situation is better than it looks. Right now, the company is enduring a lean period in terms of big movies being available on its service, he says -- but in Q2 several of the content deals it recently purchased with the likes of The Weinstein Company, DreamWorks, and Epix, will start bearing fruit, and could help Netflix get its mojo back. TubeMogul Claims to be Largest Buyer of Real-Time VideoTechCrunch was one of the few industry pubs to report on the new statistics that TubeMogul released earlier this week in which it claimed to be the biggest buyer of real-time video ads. That message was corroborated by several big sellers, including LiveRail and Google, who said that TubeMogul was either their biggest -- or one of their biggest -- buyers. According to the most recent comScore Video Metrix report, TubeMogul’s ads were viewed 537 million times in March, reaching 16 percent of the U.S. population, which is more than sites like Hulu or ESPN. It’s also the only company on comScore’s list that is focused entirely on real-time video buying. TubeMogul’s last big claim was that every auto and media company in the Fortune 100 list had run a campaign on its platform in the last year.
Two items reported in the news this month demonstrate how oft-overlooked media consumer preferences are beginning to shift the landscape and business model for ad-supported T/V (television/video). News item #1: an across-the-board decline in traditional, linear TV audiences. Observers suggest the reasons for recent, surprising drops in network and cable prime-time audiences range from poor measurement to DVR playbacks taking time away from live viewing to an early and warm spring. I would add another: that viewers moving to various on-demand platforms account for more viewing in locations where traditional (Nielsen) ratings are not picked up. Advertisers who haven’t yet expanded their media investments into on-demand platforms (Hulu, Xfinity, cable operator on-demand channels, Xbox Live, etc.) will suffer a further loss of “potential exposure” with these drops. This loss will be particularly acute in younger demos, who grew up with the on-demand world of the Internet and are shifting more rapidly to online and mobile T/V viewing platforms. The big challenge and opportunity for ad spenders moving money to on-demand platforms will be that content providers are installing far less ad loads per program than for linear television (see my recent article for a snapshot of this). These advertisers will need to be prepared to 1) use a hybrid audience measurement approach tailored to their specific buys in order to evaluate whether their investment goals have been realized; and 2) be prepared to pay a higher CPM (cost-per-thousand “opportunities for exposure”), though in reality, this will no longer be “opportunities for exposure,” but actually a verified CPE (cost-per-engagement) for ads that are actually seen. In a marketplace where supply is declining, this shift to a different valuation system will be necessary. I offer, though, that this is not a bad thing for advertisers, as the decrease in clutter, reduced ad-avoidance and the assurance of engagement will more than make up for any blind adherence to outdated CPM measurements and criteria. News item #2: Over-the-top (OTT) T/V services are developing original programming, sometimes with traditional television providers. There’s a strong viewer hunger for quality T/V programming, seen in the popularity of shows like “Downton Abbey” (PBS), “Mad Men” (AMC), “The Killing” (AMC), “Game of Thrones” (HBO), “The Borgias” (Showtime), “The Good Wife” (CBS), “Revenge” (ABC), “The Closer “(TNT), “In Plain Sight” (USA) and others. Notice how many of these programs come from cable networks. Back in the early 1980s, when cable was new and had insignificant ratings, it would have been unimaginable that they could fund quality content to compete with the big 3 networks. What cable networks had that the broadcast networks didn’t was strong dual revenue streams -- subscriptions and advertising -- that they could (and still do) reinvest into content, attracting new audiences, increasing both subscription and advertising revenue, and reinvesting again into content. Today we see Netflix and Hulu beginning to produce original content, some of it pretty high quality (Netflix’s “House of Cards” employs top talent and is based on the successful BBC/PBS mini-series). Hulu has the dual revenue stream of subscriptions (Hulu Plus) and advertising, and Netflix would be well-advised to develop the same. Even when players like Fox and most cable networks are limiting/denying programming rights to these over-the-top distributors, they shouldn’t be ignored. The Internet today offers a low cost and broad-based distribution system that has never been seen in the media industry, already dramatically shifting consumer habits, business models and pricing for music and book publishing. With players like Amazon Plus, Xbox Live -- and, rumor has it, Google and Apple -- ready to join the fray, the proprietary cable systems and their content partners will no longer have the kind of control over viewing consumption that have made them so profitable in the past. Perhaps that is why CBS is working with Netflix, seeing it not as a competitor but as a category-expander and even a potential customer. This kind of smart reframe around industry change, embracing rather than trying to control and defend old ways, can and will make for some very positive outcomes for all parties -- financially and in the overall T/V viewing experience
I just did some calculations. If I were to thank my mom for everything she's done for me - all the cooking and cleaning, all the nurturing and encouraging, all the alibi-providing and bond-posting - it would take 42 days, at the rate of 15 seconds per incident-specific allocation of gratitude. Were I to throw in some apologies for individual instances of inappropriate conduct, it would add another three months to the appreciation/atonement binge. I was a pain in the ass of a kid - think Burning Man reenactments in the playroom and unlicensed goldfish autopsies on the kitchen counter. Rather than spend the summer ping-ponging between thanks and apologies, I'll just zip over this link to Procter & Gamble's genuine, touching video tribute to momsy, with a note along the lines of "this, times 41 thousand. And again, sorry about that misunderstanding with the NSA." In the run-up to Mother's Day, I imagine I won't be the only wayward son who does so. The genius of the clip, "Best Job/P&G London 2012 Olympic Games Film," lies in its simplicity. Over the course of two minutes, it sketches the relationships between a handful of mothers and their Olympic-bound kids, paying equal attention to the sacrifices (early wake-ups, on-demand transportation, etc.) and the triumphs (whipping less-dotingly-parented kids in the pool and on the mat). We see mom prodding Junior/Juniorita out of bed in the dark pre-dawn hush, washing his/her gear and consoling him/her after setbacks. The kicker arrives at the 105-second mark: "The hardest job in the world is the best job in the world." Then, you weep openly. Color me stunned that, of all the consumer-goods leviathans out there, it's Procter & Gamble that has managed to provoke such an immediate, powerful response. To state the obvious, the company's products have long been a mainstay in kitchens, bathrooms and laundry rooms around the globe. Despite their omnipresence, however, neither P&G nor any of its individual brands have forged much of an emotional bond. To wit: I like the way Tide de-soils my socks, but my feelings about it stop right there. I wouldn't invite it to poker night, say, or name a child after it, however euphoniously "Tide Springsteen Dobrow" may roll off the tongue. That's why "Best Job" is so effective, independent of its ties to P&G's Olympic sponsorships. It affirms the company's place in our lives without crisply articulating each of its 32 gazillion brand names (only Pampers, Duracell, Tide and Gillette are given the briefest of shout-outs) or specifically depicting the use of its products. Viewers just inherently assume that any/all messes are mopped with a clump of Bounty towels and that cramped quarters are rendered nasally palatable with Febreze. The sacrifices and everyday heroism of the featured moms are underplayed, which serves to bolster anything that eases their responsibilities (read: P&G products) by association. I can't find enough good things to say about "Best Job," so I'll stop now before I embarrass myself. In conclusion: Thanks, mom. And thanks, faceless cog in the P&G marketing machine who put this thing together. I'm gonna go hug something now.
This is a special time in the ad industry. What happens in the second quarter's upfronts will go a long way toward determining industry economics for the rest of the year. Now is when we will see whether the cyclically down first quarter will be a memory or a portent of the future. Now is when we see who who controls pricing in the $70 billion annual U.S. TV ad market, and who will leverage the subsequent spot market. Perhaps a preview can be seen in NBC’s asking almost $1 million for a 30-second spot in its new Thanksgiving-night NFL broadcast featuring the New England Patriots against Tim Tebow (er, I mean the New York Jets). This week was the coming-out party for Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, AOL and Hulu and their Newfront to see if Web video can get a seat at the "adults table" within the context of the upfront market. What will have happened when this week and quarter play out? To answer that, I will borrow a Jack Welchism and try to look "at the market as it is, not just as we would like it to be." To do that, I will call on the analysis of the smartest observer of the ad market I have encountered, Brian Wieser of Pivotal Research. In his recent "Madison and Wall" Report, Brian had a number of observations on the current state of the ad market. Here are those that struck me as both sobering and on-target: TV will have a strong upfront. TV sellers will do well in this upfront, if for no other reason than the structure of the market continues to favor TV broadcast networks that can deliver large packages of audience reach. TV ad buyers and marketers are not yet ready to reduce this scarcity by better assessing the actual business outcomes they drive with these TV ad products. Alternatives to big TV ad buys are some time away. As Wieser sees it, TV ad buyers won't have leverage in the pricing and packaging of the TV ad inventory they buy until they have a "credible ability to walk away." Today, no other medium, not even cable TV, has demonstrated the ability to deliver the same quantity and quality of audience reach as broadcast TV. Web video not big enough -- or growing fast enough -- to matter. While the category of online video is fast-growing, it was only $1.8 billion last year, less than 2% of the TV ad spend. And, as Wieser notes, if you look past the numbers for the two largest players in video advertising sales, Google's YouTube and Hulu, there is very little growth. The rest of the market only grew 10% to 20% in total last year. Online display in trouble. Wieser notes that when you look past search, video and mobile, the best thing you can say about the rest of the online ad market "is that it wasn't negative." The commoditization of display inventory, and the transparency that online ad buyers and marketers have into its actual value to drive business outcomes, has meant very little growth in display. You have to wonder how much that was a factor in super fast-growing Facebook's recent claim that its first quarter ad revenue (below its fourth quarter last year) was due to old-style cyclicality. Many of us would like to believe that the ad market is approaching a digitally driven "tipping point" that will empty buckets of TV ad spend into digital alternatives, and that the upfront market will collapse. Wieser doesn't see these events happening anytime soon. Do you?
comScore, reporting on the results of a study on the synergy of professionally produced video content and user generated product videos in marketing campaigns, found that professionally produced video content and user generated product videos are highly synergistic, driving higher levels of sales effectiveness when used in tandem. The study evaluated an actual campaign that included a combination of a professionally produced “how to” video and a user generated product video that was created and submitted by an actual product user. The first group of consumers in the study participated in a veiled exercise in order to determine the sales effectiveness of the professionally produced content, the user-generated content, and both together. Professionally produced content generated a 24.7 point lift in Share of Choice for the featured product and a 16 point lift for the brand’s total line. User generated product videos drove an 18.7 point lift in Share of Choice for the featured product compared to a 10 point lift for the brand’s total line. When exposed to both professional content and user generated product videos, lift in Share of Choice for the featured product jumped to 35.3 points for the featured product and 28 points for the brand’s total line. This demonstrates not only the value of each of these media individually, but also the powerful combination when used together. Lifts in Share of Choice After Veiled Exposure to Video Content (March 2012 Total U.S.) Professionally ProducedUser GeneratedPP & UG Together Featured Product +24.7 +18.7 +35.3 Brand’s Total Line +16.0 +10.0 +28.0 Source: comScore, Inc., April 2012 Frank Findley, Vice President, Research and Development at comScore, says, in answer to “... do user-generated videos complement professionally produced content... (the study) found strong evidence of incremental benefit with exposure to both forms of media...” A second group of consumers participated in a cued exposure exercise and were surveyed after being directly exposed to the content. On its own, professionally produced content resulted in a higher percentage of respondents understanding the importance of the key message presented than user generated content, while the user generated product videos were more successful at producing emotional intensity, key message communication, and ease of relating. When consumers were exposed to both professionally produced and user generated content, the combined increases were greater than for either of the individual media exposures. Percent of Audience Exhibiting Specified Responses to Video Content (March 2012 Total U.S.) Professionally ProducedUser GeneratedPP & UG Together Emotional intensity 77% 84% 85% Key message communication 55% 60% 65% Easy to relate to 79% 83% 87% Importance of key message 84% 80% 89% Source: comScore, Inc., April 2012 Jessica Thorpe, Vice President of Marketing at EXPO, concludes that “... professionally produced content and user generated product videos are each successful at delivering different key elements to a consumer through video ‘advertising’... feature benefits are more believable when coming directly from the brand through professionally produced content, while the unbiased user generated videos were more believable in verifying specific product claims, such as superiority and convenience... used together, all of the perceived gaps get filled in and consumers become more confident in their purchase decision... resulting in better sales effectiveness from the advertising.” For additional information from comScore, please visit here.