Agency.com redeemed by its Skittles work?
Skittles took over Twitter yesterday. Discussion of Agency.com's extreme social makeover of Skittles.com swamped the service, with people posting profane messages to get on the brand's site and various social-media gurus, ninjas and black belts offering chin-stroking analysis of the effort. Is the site the breakthrough humankind has waited for? The stock market sadly didn't think so. Whether the stunt has any legs remains to be seen. In any case, when was the last time a consumer packaged-goods Web site got so much buzz? At some point, you have to hand it to the folks at Agency.com for having the guts to sell this idea through to Mars. The question, though, is whether this finally exorcises the ghosts of the infamous Subway pitch video, or if it just adds another black mark to Agency.com because it took an idea from Modernista! Vote below. Photo: Special on Flickr. —Posted by Brian Morrissey |
|
March 3, 2009 in Agency web sites, Agency.com, Candy, Modernista!, Morrissey, Skittles | Permalink |
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
I really don't think "ripping off" the idea from modernista is the issue... Live online chat has been done on a webpage before, framing of another webpage, has been done before.
I think the failed execution was what is the issue.
Some Suggestions:
1. Use other option for display of webpage, i.e. program embedded [digsby/thwirl/tweetdeck or other] in adobe or flash, etc.. instead of just twitter html output itself in a URL frame. Then you are filtering twitter output instead of the twitter webpage itself.
2. Filters - start here and add as needed - http://support.discusware.com/center/resources/...
(or something, this may be someone's IP so use with caution, i.e. check with them first.)
Get Twitter involved:
3. Moderator or Sys Admin coordination with Twitter to block IP addresses from posting,
(i'm guessing this is billable or sponsored, etc...)
4. Increase @spam support to delete offensive hatetweetbots to curb flooding of racial slurs. (something good for twitter anyways and again billable hours?)
5. URL filter capability to curb virus launches and/or spam.
(all needed features anyway for easier ticker broadcast of twitter streams)
Agency.com gets the FAILWHALE
Posted by: steve plunkett | Mar 3, 2009 11:36:46 AM
I bet if Agency.com gets the Reebok account they'll use this tagline: Just do it.
Posted by: Unconcerned Citizen | Mar 3, 2009 11:42:23 AM
P.S. The new website from candy maker Skittles is like stealing candy from an ad agency.
Posted by: Unconcerned Citizen | Mar 3, 2009 11:52:03 AM
Uh, yeah it got a lot of traffic from the Ad Industry not consumers. Agency dot com gets another black mark. By the way, I'm tired of the supposed "social-media gurus, ninjas and black belts." Their self serving chin-stroking analysis is just that, self serving.
Posted by: Lumberjack | Mar 3, 2009 12:46:14 PM
How can anyone say this is impressive in any way?
This is simply a rip-off of the Modernista site.
There should be no further discussion, except to deride Agency.com for such hackery.
Posted by: dutycalls | Mar 3, 2009 2:07:58 PM
What are Skittles?
Posted by: Herbert | Mar 3, 2009 2:13:53 PM
I basically with dutycalls, except to answer Herbert, that they are related to a suppository product named "Skattles". Or so I read on some Skittles site... ;-)
Posted by: Rich | Mar 3, 2009 2:23:30 PM
Posted by: Stephen Thompson, ECD iCrossing | Mar 3, 2009 2:36:10 PM
critics critics critics.
give them a chance to report the numbers. At this rate, they will never tell us. I wouldn't.
geez... how can anybody call it so fast?
Pass, fail... whatever....
only they know their objectives. let them determine for themselves if it worked or not.
It will never work if we don't encourage experiments.
Posted by: collin | Mar 3, 2009 4:06:24 PM
I foresee this becoming another "project" for internet communities. Groups of nerds everywhere are probably already preparing massive attacks to claim theirs what was once a normal website, and has now become another place to spam goatse on.
Posted by: rabram | Mar 3, 2009 4:55:06 PM
The experiment has failed.
Posted by: Rich | Mar 3, 2009 4:55:08 PM
Yeah the poll needs better choices. It wasn't the 'ripoff' aspect that was the issue. As we can all see today, Skittles.com changed their emphasis from Twitter as the homepage to Facebook as the homepage. Why? Because people were twittering dumb things like a few that I caught yesterday:
"Skittles gave my cat AIDS"
"if u mention skittles in your post u appear on www.skittles.com if you mention offensive words and skittles u still appear haha"
"Last time I ate skittles was 10 years ago. Just because they're on twitter changes nothing"
Another issue is that skittles never participated in the conversation so it was this ridiculous free for all on their homepage that people laughed at all day.
Posted by: Christopher Baccus | Mar 3, 2009 4:59:07 PM
I will never hire anyone with that work in their book. The CD and team have zero creative integrity.
Posted by: Almar | Mar 3, 2009 5:04:17 PM
Hershey should do this. Watch how quickly Agency.com sues Hershey's agency, and Skittles sues Hershey.
I'm disgusted that this conversation went from thievery to social media strategy. Our industry is truly made of hacks. No one bothers even to try to be creative and inventive. No wonder clients want to pay us less and are looking for answers outside Madison avenue. Shame on you Agency.com.
Posted by: Jpeel | Mar 3, 2009 5:23:14 PM
Jpeel: If Detroit keeps losing money and making gas guzzlers that are bad for their customers/environment, why keep buying their cars or funding the companies? Heaven forbid brands look for companies outside of Madison Ave. to help them make an impact or get noticed away from a :30 spot.
Posted by: rogers hornsby | Mar 3, 2009 6:01:41 PM
@ rogers
I hear you. My point wasn't that they shouldn't look outside Madison Ave. It's that its no wonder they are when the industry's response to a blatant theft is "no ideas are unique the more important point is that the client was brave." Brave enough to buy a stolen idea, I say.
Posted by: Jpeel | Mar 3, 2009 8:58:05 PM
ORIGINALITY FAIL
I sincerely hope this campaign will be blacklisted from any industry accolades, it is a direct and shameless theft.
I guess it was gonna happen some time, but I expected it from a big, bad out of touch agency, and not the skittles client...
Posted by: chris | Mar 3, 2009 8:58:15 PM
Agency.com redeemed by its Skittles work? NO. Peter Arnell redeemed by Skittles work.
Posted by: it's me | Mar 3, 2009 10:41:28 PM
Can someone please explain the insight or consumer benefit here? This is nothing more than exploiting a tactic - and a great example of how online agencies have a myopic, non-integrated view of the world - yet seem to think they 'own' this world.
Can Agency.com please leave the building.
Posted by: kps | Mar 3, 2009 11:52:24 PM
It's funny that people keep talking about ripping off ideas and no one is crediting strawberryfrog for Girlssmiles.org or Zeus Jones for their website, which I believe both came out before Modernista. Maybe people should step away from their creative circlejerks and think about the bigger picture: all of these companies have helped to create a new model for communication, not advertising with each of their projects. It just blurs that line between advertising, digital and PR even further. Scary, but true.
Posted by: rogershornsby | Mar 4, 2009 9:42:11 AM
You don't get it Roger. the agency.com work is an exact rip off of modernista. Right down to the copy and order of the social networkinbg sites. They didn't even bother to hide their tracks.
Posted by: JasonB | Mar 4, 2009 9:59:44 AM
@rogershornby,
Fair point re Zeus Jones. Girlsmiles.org came out after Modernista's site relaunched, although StrawberryFrog's Scott Goodson said work on it began a month before Modernista's revamp. http://tinyurl.com/57pnnt
Posted by: Brian Morrissey | Mar 4, 2009 10:01:34 AM
Poll should include some middle ground. Parts of it were very successful, other parts of it could have been handled better. I think this concept works better for skittles than it does for modernista, if I'm hiring an ad agency I want casework and content, not social buzz. If I want to be amused by my food, profane twitter comments actually does the trick for me. I voted as a success but would have rather given them a "success, but..."
Posted by: Nick R | Mar 4, 2009 11:27:35 AM
Let me put it this way: statistically, what can be the percentage of Agency.com employees in the whole Adweek audience? Less than 5%? So, it would be more honest to put down the survey this way: "Would you like to kill your competitor? YES/NO"
Posted by: Nicola | Mar 5, 2009 6:57:55 AM
