--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffrey Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Saying sex sells is only a small part of a longstanding and more > comprehensive theory in advertising that creating a somewhat realistic > aspirational arrival point for an audience is what sells. This is why we > have women presenting on many of these shows that are good looking, but more > within reach for male audiences than a runway model would be. The idea that > these male viewers have somewhat of a "chance" keeps eyes on the screen, or > at least encourages the eyes to return to the screen.
Interesting point. That makes sense. It also makes sense from a basic, yet admittedly stereotypical position of "models being models", and mostly nothing else. If you hire a model that's TOO attractive, the viewer isn't going to internally BELIEVE that she actually knows (or cares) anything about the topic. I know that's unfair, and that there are lots of really attractive women that are really intelligent and have great personalities at the same time. However, it would be the same effect as "booth babes" at trade shows or "umbrella girls" @ MotoGP races. You might feed the booth babes a couple of lines about the product, but nobody believes they're anything more than hired guns, designed to "cheat" the viewer into paying attention in the direction of the product they're standing next to... while they're wearing spandex in the middle of winter. (not that *I*m complaining about THAT! :D) I'm not talking about women that actually know something and are representatives of the company, but you'll notice that they tend to be dressed differently, and have a completely different presentation and presence. They're expected to be knowledgeable and proficient, because they're the SUBSTANCE, the bridge between the gawkers coming by to see the booth babes, and them actually becoming aware of and interested in buying her company's product. So, yes... Part of "the formula" is "go good-looking-female, but don't overdo it!" :D > When looking across > the advertising spectrum and into more general interest brands that run > across demographics, you see that this theory has manifested in more diverse > ways than the proliferation of sexuality. There's nothing overtly or > covertly sexual in Apple's marketing of the iPod, for example, but there is > something overtly sexy about how an iPod is marketed. > > I personally think it's a bit silly to keep repeating the > girl-tells-us-about-tech model over and over, lazily avoiding the > development of new audiences. I'd love to get some research on this, but I > hypothesize that these types of shows (Webb Alert, Geekbrief, etc. > Rocketboom is a bit different because there's more of a hipster demo going > on there) are being watched by the same slowly-growing crowd. Unfortunately, as "the formula" keeps working, groups are going to keep *working* it. LonelyBoy15 would have been a never-viewed failure. I agree with you that it's laziness. At this point in time, groups are struggling JUST to put a show together, forget about experimenting with new models! :) They want to know what attractive girl they can get, how well she comes across on camera and how much 'cred' she has in whatever the field is.... in THAT order. 'Cred' is good for initial numbers, but not necessary if she can read what the ghost-writers feed her. > I am looking forward to seeing who's going to be brave enough to throw away > or at least expand on the girl-on-a-screen model when it comes to tech > reporting on the web, creating a larger market than the present niche by > providing aspirational arrival points for more than just males, primarily > 18-25, maybe 35. These shows have mastered a niche, but have are not > bringing other niches to the table as building blocks to a larger and more > general audience. Excellent point. The target zone is getting younger, not older. Shows are being made to appeal to the lowest common denominator, like MTV-watchers, viral video and email-joke-senders. I had a meeting with a newspaper owner about bringing his paper online, and his inital response was "well... that might be good for the younger readers...". I think that in general, people are seeing technology as being used increasingly by younger viewers/users and assuming that older internet users just fade away. Using your "aspirational arrival points" theory, the younger a female lead is in a show, the farther away she gets from being in the AAP of an older male, who would feel less and less like he "had a chance" with her, and in some cases would see her more and more as "his daughter" telling him about tech rather than a respected female peer. > Entities that appeal to women, especially young women, and > the heavy-spending and freetime-rich baby boomers as they retire at > increasing rates will do the best. Repeating the same model just because > it's been successful before will not do that. That's another great idea... Appeal TO women. :) Unfortunately, when we see demographic poll results of, I believe 8% of Rocketboom's audience being female AT ALL, I can't see people hustling to attempt to capture the attention of baby-boomers, as you mention. However, you could choose to see it as "If only this low amount of females is watching Rocketboom, what ARE they watching, or what WOULD they watch if they had their druthers? I was thinking about this once, when I had reason to be in a warehouse-type store, due to the fault of someone who shall remain unnamed [coughdanmcvicarcough]. I noticed how many people were literally STREAMING past the registers buying stuff. I realized I probably could have mentioned to 98% of them some names of shows that I watch online, and they'd have no clue that that show existed. I wondered how to drag all of those people, aimlessly streaming past me, into viewing an online show..... -- Bill Cammack http://CammackMediaGroup.com > And for Jason I get your response and agree with much of what you say. But > I think you also get that creating a context in which achieving what you > outlined in your response can live by explain exactly what you did in > response to me is very important, albeit easily forgotten tedious at times. > > > > On 13/11/2007, danielmcvicar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Mike > > I was flip, but sex is what does sell, in advertising, etc. > > However, once it is sold, what are you bringign. Not just sex, but a > > service. You must > > give some nutrition with dessert, and once you bring people into the > > community, listen, > > get involved, and ultimately lead. > > > > This is a good discussion > > D > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com <videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>, > > "Mike Meiser" <groups-yahoo-com@> wrote: > > > > > > And don't listen to Daniel McVicar. :) > > > > > > Sorry daniel. Sex sells is B.S. If you want a genuine audience... > > > an audience of makers, participators and creators... like maholo > > > fundamentally needs to survive... you're downplay the overt sexiness > > > of Veronica, and up-play her obvious street cred. Veronica should go > > > all out and be the geek and gaming girl she was born to be... not put > > > on the tight fitting shirt and dumb herself down. > > > > > > This is much like the youtube issue earlier. Youtube courts a lot of > > > non-genuine traffic... people there for the crowd and spectacle... > > > people who leave assinine comments and wouldn't watch your show if it > > > wasn't the most popular video of the day. > > > > > > This is VERY often seen amongst many top youtube people. 500,000 hits > > > on one video 11,000 on the next. > > > > > > In the racing world you're only as good as your last race... in the > > > youtube world your only really as big as your least viewed video. That > > > is more reflective of your real audience. > > > > > > In order for maholo to survive it must tap into that culture of > > > creators, makers, participators... communicators. > > > > > > -Mike > > > > > > On 11/12/07, danielmcvicar <danielmcvicar@> wrote: > > > > Hi Jason > > > > Your view level is pretty good, your show looks very good. > > > > > > > > If you want more views, put it across the board on multiple servers > > and hosts. You'd > > be > > > > surprised at how many you can get at Daily Motion. > > > > > > > > You may also experiment with short sweet and sexy promos. Across the > > board. > > > > > > > > Sex is what attracts attention the most, the hook is something that > > you have an > > instinct > > > > for. > > > > > > > > Then, as a daily show, you are a service, liek Rocketboom, more than a > > brand like > > French > > > > Maid TV. Your audience will find a certain comfort in watching the > > videos daily. > > > > > > > > What I enjoyed with The Late Nite Mash experiment was a surprise to > > me...coming > > from > > > > audience counting media. It was the collaboration that I found online > > and in the > > > > community. > > > > > > > > All the best with your show. > > > > > > > > Daniel > > > > > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com <videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>, > > "Jason McCabe Calacanis" <jason@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > We launched Mahalo Daily with Veronica Belmont last week as some of > > > > > you might know. You can find the show at http://daily.mahalo.com and > > > > > on iTunes. We're hosting it at Blip.Tv (for now) but considering > > some > > > > > other options since folks have been pinging us. > > > > > > > > > > I'm looking for some advice on what we can do--other than make the > > > > > best show we can--to grow the view to 100k+ a day quickly. > > > > > > > > > > We did over 120k views in the first week (about 12-37k views for > > each > > > > > of the first four shows) which is much more than I thought we would. > > > > > We've got our iTunes page running and we're syndicating the videos > > to > > > > > YouTube and Facebook. We've also started a Facebook, Ning, Flickr, > > and > > > > > Twitter groups/accounts to compliment the program. They are getting > > > > > nice pickup. > > > > > > > > > > On a business level, I'm wondering if there is anyone out there who > > > > > can bring in 100-250k views a day for show, perhaps in exchange for > > > > > exclusive hosting rights/advertising rights or something (i.e. > > Yahoo, > > > > > AOL, YouTube, etc). > > > > > > > > > > Anyone have an distribution tips? > > > > > Has anyone done deals like this? > > > > > > > > > > Mahalo for any help... > > > > > > > > > > best J > > > > > > > > > > i blogged about this here: > > > > > > > http://www.calacanis.com/2007/11/11/congrats-to-tyler-and-veronica-on-an- > > > > amazing-first-week-for-mahalo/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Jeffrey Taylor > Mobile: +33625497654 > Fax: +33177722734 > Skype: thejeffreytaylor > Googlechat/Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://twitter.com/jeffreytaylor > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >
