• by Erik Sass , Staff Writer @eriksass1, October 29, 2008

Wow. That’s all there is to say about it. Actually no, there’s more: in the midst of much conversation about whether, how and why user-generated content “works” or falls flat, Joshua Katz, president of marketing for Al Gore’s CurrentTV, showed three examples of ads created by CurrentTV fans for various products which were, in a word, incredible. Not only do they “work,” they were equal if not superior to expensive brand advertising.

The first, by 23-year-old John Roberts of North Carolina, was a funny one minute video profile of John’s relationship with his Toyota Prius, in which he is sloppily, embarrassingly adoring of the car in a way usually reserved for romantic relationships. No, not gross physical humor, nothing scatological, just a satire of that one friend who can’t stop telling you how great things are now that love has entered his or her life. Along the way, it delivers some of the genuine affection people feel for their Priuses (Prii?)

The next, created by a 19-year-old from Minneapolis (missed his name) was nothing short of amazing. With the title “Transformation,” it used computer animation to show various Sony devices morphing into each other with the “camera” panning around them for a spinning 3-D view. An electronic soundtrack and 3-D single-word captions emphasizing Sony’s nifty brand attributes complemented crisp, complex animation equal to anything in the “Transformers” movie.

Last but not least, Jon Anderson, 23, of Centreville, Ohio created another computer-animated ad for XM Satellite Radio, in which the camera zooms into the digital volume and balance display of a radio to reveal a whole urban landscape peopled by animated characters enjoying different kinds of music (emphasizing the variety available to satellite radio subscribers). Again, incredible.

There is a problem, however. In the first example, the ad managed to combine sophisticated production with a grainy video feel that, in my potentially outdated view, bespeaks true UGC authenticity. The latter two, however, were so good that they were as Katz observed “indistinguishable from the brand campaign itself.” While impressive, there’s nothing that distinguishes them from “real” advertising, begging the question, what’s the point?  Are they one-offs, only meant to be viewed at a special contest site with the knowledge that they are user-generated, or are they truly intended for mass consumption?  If the latter, is the benefit simply a matter of economics, cutting down costs on ad production by farming it out to brilliant high school and college students?  A fine rationale, if that’s the case, but either way advertisers need to decide what it is they want out of UGC ads.