Interestingly enough, to both aspects of this conversation, A) Mahalo, and B) formula...
Veronica posted today that Mahalo Daily was featured on iTunes today: <http://www.veronicabelmont.com/2007/11/mahalo-daily-featured-on-itunes/> along with WallStrip, Daily Feed, Epic-Fu, Crave, Alive in Mexico, Fuel TV, and NPR: Bryant Park Project. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Cammack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffrey Taylor" > <thejeffreytaylor@> 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 <danielmcvicar@> 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: thejeffreytaylor@ > > http://twitter.com/jeffreytaylor > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > >
