#prad585

Summary of Article

There has been an increase in coordinating events via social media as a way to organize. Online forums have created new data to analyze and measure human behavior. There has also been a shift on these platforms from text reports to visual reports using photo and video. The goal of this research article was to see if it is possible to identify protest outbreaks through quantitative analysis using photographs uploaded to Flickr in 2013. This is an example of the study of human behavior using online platforms on a global scale.

 Materials and Methods

Researchers collected 29,944,764 geotagged photographs uploaded to Flickr between January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013. They collected details from the photographs such as: information about the photographer, title of photo, url where a user could download it, location where the photograph was taken, the time it was taken and tags that were used to categorize it. All the photographs collected used the tag word “protest”. They translated the tag “protest” into 34 different languages to account its global scale. They then broke down the research into weekly (Monday thru Sunday) segments and then separated them by their respected countries. There were 244 countries and regions. To account for Ground Truth, a term used to refer to information provided by direct observation rather than information provided by inference, the researchers collected articles related to protests. They collected 178,730 articles from The Guardian online edition for all of 2013. Articles were collected using the same rules as the collected Flickr photographs. They separated articles based on their country and region, used the tag word “protest” (which was also translated into 34 different languages) and separated articles into weekly segments. The Guardian uses a different tagging system than Flickr for the UK and the US, therefore researchers separated articles based on the tag: England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland for the UK and for the US they used the tag US News. The goal was to see if there was a relationship between Flickr user activity and protest outbreaks and to see whether there was an outcome variable between The Guardian articles and the Flickr photographs.

 Key Conclusions

Researchers found clear differences between Flickr and The Guardian online articles but also similarities such as an increase in protests in Brazil and Turkey in June 2013. They found that there was a greater number of protests Flickr photographs in a given week related to a specific region or country corresponded to a greater proportion of The Guardian articles that were tagged using the word “protest” in those same areas. This meant that if they were to fix the tagged Flickr photographs at 0.1 it would increase the number of protest themed articles by 34%. Researchers found that they could not rule out the possibility that Flickr users were posting photographs as a direct result of a published article relating to protests, however with geotagging it made it was less likely a cause.

 My Opinion

This article failed to follow through in the research. The authors did not analyze the data in detail such as: describing similarities and differences between The Guardian articles and Flickr photographs, what accounted for these differences or similarities, any discrepancies between the data and how they got to a 34% increase. The tagging system used for The Guardian articles differed to Flickr but only in regards to location. I was confused as to if that changed the data. I would assume that readers could access what country or region was being discussed just by reading it. This then leads to questions such as: Does the tagging systems matter if you are referring to location? Was it just another data asset to add? Could it have changed the accuracy of the data?  This research did however give valuable insight into how it can be used to measure human behavior at a global scale using free and cheap sources.

Facebook advertising has become increasingly popular over the years.  Eighty-four percent of Fortune 500 companies have Facebook pages.  Looking at the recent survey conducted by the CMO, the social media budget is expected to rise to 23.8% over the next five years.  

The American Marketing Association conducted a study to see if there is a correlation in behavior of Facebook page likers and nonlikers. They tested this experiment on Discovery Vitality, an incentive-based wellness program that is affiliated with Discovery Health, a large private health insurer in South Africa.  

 Summary of Article

Vitality sent an email to invite new customers to participate in the study. All new customers between January 1, 2013 and June 30, 2013, who had an email addresses were asked to join the study.  New customers were the target in the study because they were less likely to have already liked the company’s Facebook page. On February 18, 2014, an email was sent out to complete an online survey about the relationship between Facebook and health behavior. Customers who did not fill the survey out were sent reminders on February 20 and 25th.

Customers were first asked if they had a Facebook.  The study found that 18.5% of participants did not have a Facebook. As a result, they were thanked for participating and were given no further instructions. For the participants that did have a Facebook, they were asked if they had already liked the Vitality Facebook page.  The 27.3% who liked Vitality’s Facebook page were not permitted to continue past this portion of the survey. The remaining group of 4,054 customers were assigned randomly to either the treatment or controlled conditions. Customers who were assigned the controlled condition were not invited to like the Facebook page. Their survey ended after they filled out the first two questions.  The treatment group was divided into two groups. Each group was given two different messages. The first group was provided a link and directed to like the Facebook page. The content of group one’s message was focused on improving health. The objective of the first group was to find out if they like the page because of interest in improving health.  The second group’s message was focused on rewards they could gain through Vitality programs. The purpose of the second group was to find out if they liked the page because of the benefits or trying to avoid losses.

The groups were monitored for six months to see if Facebook likes encourage offline brand engagement. During the first four months after the interaction with the customers, there was little interaction organically with the Facebook page. In the last two months, Vitality paid to boost two posts per week on Facebook. The study predicted that if the Facebook page influenced behavior by providing a platform for customer initiated social interactions, then they could observe effects on offline customer behavior (i.e., earning Vitality points) during the organic period (Mochon, 309). During this period, customers could use the page for word-of- mouth information, but were not likely to be exposed to the company’s messages.  This is due to Facebook content filters. The organic period is supposed to represent the other potential social effects of liking a page, in which the article interpreted the data to mean brand loyalty or brand engagement.

 Key Conclusions

 The data represented comes from three areas:

1. Customers’ responses to the invitation survey

2. Aggregate Facebook activity date on Vitality page recorded by Facebook   Insights

3. Points activity in the Vitality program

The study discovers that customers were more likely to accept the invitation when focused on Vitality rewards rather than the health benefits. Customers were more likely to accept the invitation when it was explained in terms of benefits rather than losses. However, the rewards were more affective when explained in terms of losses.

The results lead to the suggestion that Facebook pages are most successful when used as a platform for firm-initiated promotional communications. There were no results of having any effect of page likes on subsequent behavior when the Facebook page acted as a platform for customers to engage in social interaction. Facebook word-of-mouth did not seem to effect offline behavior in this study. Facebook was most effective when Vitality paid to reach the customers with the organizations information. Facebook page likes were found to be most successful to online users who are not heavy Facebook users. This indicates that the possibility that news feed clutter has become an obstacle to reach customers. Those who spent more time on Facebook and tend to like other Facebook pages, showed little effect on liking Vitality’s page. This was the case when the Facebook page was boosted too.

Sixty-nine percent of active customers liked the Facebook page. This shows how easy it is to obtain Facebook likes. If firms gave an incentive to like their Facebook page, the study shows that many customers would do so. Reward-based focus effect was increased by explaining the page likes to avoid a missed opportunity. This shows that framing manipulation are easy to apply and will increase the amount of responses.

 My Opinion

Overall, I noticed that the study was just touching the surface of discovering the impact of Facebook page likes and the long-term effects of Facebook promotional usage during the boost time frame. The results did show that the boost time frame was the most successful. The article revealed that a Facebook like is easy to attain. In addition, providing incentives and benefits to the customer would help achieve more page likes.

Altogether, I was hoping to find more information on whether or not liking a Facebook page would have any influence on in-store behavior. It would be helpful if they included this in the study to show if likes lead to an increase in the Vitality membership.  Further, it would be interesting to look at organizations with low Facebook page likes and low social media presence. In addition, I believe it would be beneficial to use a social media monitoring tool such as Crimson Hexagon to monitor when emails were first distributed and to see the long-term affect. This would show if asking people to like their Facebook page would lead to online engagement and an increase in purchasing decisions.

 Reviewed by Elizabeth Romano

Mochon, D., Johnson, K., Schwartz, J., Ariely, D. (2017). What Are Likes Worth? A Facebook Page Field Experiment. Journal Of Marketing Research (JMR),54 (2), 306-317.

Summary of Article 

Christopher A. Summers, Robert W. Smith and Rebecca Walker Reczek started their research with an overall goal to determine how behaviorally targeted ads result in implied social labels and the labels’ effects on consumer self-perception.  In doing so, the researchers developed three hypotheses and carried out four separate but related studies.  The first hypothesis proposes that a behaviorally targeted ad will result in a change to consumers’ self-perceptions which will ultimately cause a change in behavior to match the label given by the targeted ad.  To build on that, the researchers then hypothesized that recognition of a behaviorally targeted advertisement based on past experience facilitates future behavior as a result of the implied social label.  Finally, the team stated that hypotheses one and two are true only if the implied social label is relevant to the consumer’s past behavior.

To test these hypotheses, the team conducted a four-part lab study.  Study one observed the differences between a behaviorally targeted ad, a demographically targeted ad and an untargeted ad.  The second study took the first study a step further and explored the purchase power that results from behaviorally targeted ads and identity salience and how these factors influence purchase intention over time.  In study three, the researchers built upon their purchase intention findings to determine how behavior is related to and affected by the implied label. Finally, in study four, the third hypothesis was tested the connection between self-perception and behavior based on the relevance of the implied social label.  In conducting these studies, the research team took a mixed methods approach utilizing lab experiments, surveys and post-tests to further strengthen the validity of their work.  

Key Conclusions

Throughout the various studies within the experiment, the research team collected data that was consistent with their initial hypotheses.  In creating awareness that the advertisements they saw were a result of behaviorally targeting consumers’ self-perceptions, future behavior and purchase intention evolved. In the first part of the experiment, researchers found that targeting awareness does not single-handedly affect purchase intention; however, when paired with behavioral characterization, the behaviorally targeted ad acts as an implied social label.  The results of Study Two support the second hypothesis. The second study found that implied social labels are more relevant and recognizable as a result of behaviorally versus demographically targeted ads.  This increased recognition causes self-perception adaptation based on the implied label and adjusts purchase intention.  Study Three’s results strengthen the notion that behaviorally targeted ads first affect self-perception which later leads to behavioral and purchase adaptations.  To conclude the experiment, Study Four confirmed Hypothesis Three.  An implied label must have a connection to consumers’ previous behavior in order to adjust self-perception and yield adapted behavior. As the accuracy of an implied level increase, the effects of social labeling and adjusted self-perception also increase.  

Each of the four studies within the experiment addressed a related question, however, the researchers narrowed in on controlling specific variables to achieve the best results.  The study takes a unique approach in exploring how behaviorally targeted ads can affect the self-perceptions of consumers when the ad is seen as a social label implied by advertisers.  As customization becomes increasingly popular in the world of advertising, advertisers must recognize how to properly target the right population to relate to consumers and influence purchase behavior.  

My Opinion

Every day I see ads pop up on my browser that display the last piece of clothing I viewed on a clothing site or the latest recipe I researched.  I have long wondered why and how this happens and how effective this means of targeting has been for advertisers.  The discussion on advertisers’ ability to track online behavior to serve consumers ads that can ultimately adapt self-perception and purchase behavior surprised me in many ways.  The accuracy and speed with which these ads are targeted and the amount of information internet activity can gather and store about my behavior is a bit alarming. However, as an advertiser, this information is incredibly helpful, and I understand the growing need to reach the right consumer at the right time. This research opened my eyes to the number of ads we intentionally see on a daily basis.  It is no longer just a coincident.  However, as more research is done, it is important to monitor the grey area between successful advertising and privacy invasion.  The research drew attention to more than just the effects of implied social labeling. Many internet users are unaware of the different ways in which advertisers can target individuals.  The ability to manipulate an individual’s self-perception and change purchase behavior is not something that should be invasively taken advantage of but instead, used strategically for the benefit of the advertiser and the consumer.

Although I agree with the steps the researchers took to  develop their findings and conclusions, there were a few things that could have strengthened the research.  It would have been beneficial to conduct field observations so that participants were not explicitly aware that their internet behavior was being watched and that the ads in focus had been manipulated for the study.  In many cases the lab participants were told that the ads they were served had been affected by personality traits, prior behavior or demographics.  In the field, many people do not consciously consider whether or not they see an advertisement based on previous behavior.  In addition, a lab study provides a relatively confined opportunity to target a variety of relevant behavioral characteristics depending on the individuals’ behavior and self-perception.  A more individualized approach to the study would yield applicable results.  

In agreeing with the methodology and conclusions drawn in this experiment, further research is needed to understand the full list of implied social labeling capabilities.  In the background, more information is need that supports how an outsider’s perspective on an individual affects that person.  In implied social labeling, one of the strongest behavior-changing factors is the consumer’s recognition that a marketer believes something to be true about the consumer.  Along the same line, it would be interesting to learn more about who develops these implied labels and how to measure the credibility and relevance of an ad based on a consumer’s targeted behavior.  

Professionals in the field can greatly benefit from this research.  By acknowledging the power of implied social labels, advertisers can begin to understand how consumers’ online behavior affects their self-concepts and use this to their advantage to connect with individuals.  Additionally, this research helps to further define and understand the differences between behavioral targeting and traditional demographic targeting.  

Behaviorally targeted ads and the consequent implied social labels have the power to change advertising and create an individualized experience to enhance buying power and manipulate self-perception.  Knowledge of the effects of these ads and their ability to target relevant consumer groups continues to evolve.  While this is increasingly beneficial to advertisers, consumers should also be aware that their behavior data is collected and stored. It is important to remember that the ads we see are no longer a coincidence, and ultimately, they are curated for an “Audience of One.”

Reviewed by Rachel Kesseler

Summers, C. A., Smith, R. W., & Reczek, R. W. (2016). An audience of one:     Behaviorally targeted ads as implied social labels. Journal Of Consumer Research, 43(1), 156-178. doi:10.1093/jcr/ucw012 

Authors: Marina Krcmar (Wake Forest University), Drew P. Cingel (Northwestern University). Published in the Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media.

Summary of article: Modern single-player video games are fraught with decision-making, but do players tend to make decisions based on morality (empathy toward in-game characters) or strategy (to receive better rewards from the game)? Throughout the past, video games have been called into question for making young people behave violently (like during Columbine, Hillary Clinton’s 2005 video game censorship bill, and more recently, video game minority group Gamergate and their misogynistic agenda). However, not all video games are shoot-and-kill like Halo or Call of Duty, and the modern single-player console game often forces players to pause, examine which decision is the best decision, and then act. This article was also meant to determine whether players can be genuinely empathetic to non-player characters, in spite of knowing and understanding that the game isn’t reality, and it also recorded why players made moral decisions to better understand moral cognition within gameplay. To do so, they broke moral decisions down into these five categories:

Harm/care; concerned in protection of the helpless, or in physically injuring others.

Fairness/reciprocity; concerned in valuing property ownership and paying fair costs for goods.

In-groups/loyalty; concerned in commitment to a team or association.

Respect/authority; concerned in following orders up the hierarchal rank.

Purity/sanctity; concerned with reactions against impure actions or thoughts.

Research methods: 30 participants were selected from Wake Forest University and 35 were selected from Northwestern. Participants from Wake Forest University were selected by the frequency they play video games (more than twice a week, on average) while players from Northwestern were selected by the infrequency (approximately 4 days a month, on average) based on a short survey. Median age was 20. 65% were male. 56% were white, 20% were Asian.

Each player was given a headset and a copy of the popular video game, Fallout 3. Set in a post-apocalyptic Washington D.C., this game was chosen because it offers many moral decisions that impact the gameplay experience and game’s ending, including but not limited to: Would you kill a helpless wanderer? Would you contaminate the water source of a town? Would you steal from another character instead of bartering with them? 

They were given 45 minutes to play the game. During the course of the game, they were asked to explain what decisions they were faced with, which decision they ultimately chose, and why they chose it.

Key findings: There were high percentile scores for moral reasonings of harm/care (37.6% of all decisions), fairness/reciprocity (22.2% of all decisions), and respect/authority (25.7% of all decisions).

Extremely low percentile scores were recorded for moral reasonings of in-group/loyalty (9.2% of all decisions) and purity/sanctity (1.4% of all decisions).

Results suggested that moral and strategic decisions are equal among casual video game players, while those who play video games more frequently are inclined to make more moral decisions than strategic ones.

Key conclusions: Though strategic and moral decisions are equal among casual video game players, they tend to make moral decisions based on whether or not they will hurt anyone. For instance, with harm/care, their decision to not attack a hungry wanderer; with fairness/reciprocity, their decision not to steal food or weapons; with respect/authority, their decision not to cheat the town sheriff.

Low percentile scores of in-group/loyalty and purity/sanctity can be attributed to the modern American mind-set--for instance, in-group/loyalty would be making a decision you morally question to better your organization. This may be because more modern youth consider themselves independent and individuals. For purity/sanctity, whether or not a character wants to pay for the services of a prostitute in the game, it may be because more youth tend to have a more subjective view on what is pure and what is impure.

Because more active gamers tend to make more moral decisions, it can be suggested that their comfort with the game allows them to make decisions that they believe would fill out the game’s experience for them (”Would I really shoot this guy?”), while novice video game players are driven more by curiosity (”What will happen if I shoot this guy?”). Players who play games regularly want to feel like they’re a part of that world and transpose their own personality on to that character, thus making the experience more fulfilling.

My opinion: I’ve played Fallout 3 from front-to-back. I beat the game three times and accomplished everything there was to do in the game, in addition to it’s downloadable content. Part of it is understanding how games work: though most video games are violent, many games reenforce an idea that restricting your violence will reward you better. In the Metal Gear Solid series, you get special tools for extra game plays by beating the game without killing anyone. While this is a rewards system that promotes nonviolence, there are penalties in other games that promote nonviolence. For instance, in Assassin’s Creed, you’re forced to restart your game from the last check point if you make a hostile action toward a civilian.

Though this study really made a lot of points that I agree with, I believe they handicapped themselves due to the limit of 45 minutes and by using only a single game. In a game like Fallout 3, many early decisions in the game seem clear, with obvious antagonists that you’re forced to make decisions with. 45 minutes barely permits players to leave the first stage, and those that managed to would only have so much time to truly hit the moral pay-dirt that awaited throughout the game.

-Behnam Riahi

Summary of article:

The research team of a company is always anxious to evaluate the results of advertising and media publicity. This statistical study focused on analyzing the effects of advertising spend and publicity on 5 major attributes of the marketing-productivity chain: brand attitude, sales, corporate reputation, profitability and firm value. The annual company performance reports from January 2000 to July 2003 of 12 computer technology sector companies were analyzed.

The data for the study was collected from different sources for each individual variable. The positive and negative publicity data were collected by CARMA International based on 18 national US magazines and newspapers. Corporate reputation was determined by Fortune magazine’s; “Most admired” corporate survey. To analyze stakeholder’s attitude towards the brand, 1500 buyers were asked for their opinion (positive or negative). Brand value was calculated using the Tobin’s Q, which is the ratio of the market value to the replacement costs of the company’s assets.

All these attributes were compared through unrelated regression analysis. Indirect effect of each predicted and predictor variable was calculated and compared with the help of least square regressions.

The key findings from this study are:

· Customer and market metrics are differentially influenced by advertising spending and publicity.

· Sales is not the only outcome of advertising and publicity. They influence other company attributes like corporate reputation and firm value.

· Publicity is superior to advertising, considering the attributes of corporate reputation and brand attitude.

· Advertising spending does not affect corporate reputation at all. Companies which have a stronger reputation tend to advertise less than those that have a weaker reputation.

 Key Conclusions:

Analyzing each element of the marketing-productivity chain, this research concludes:

· Advertising spend: Although advertising stimulates publicity, its importance has been diminishing. Agencies need to advise clients to formulate integrated marketing strategies revolving around advertising and traditional and social media publicity.

· Positive publicity: Since positive publicity directly affects corporate reputation, it plays an important role in creating a brand attitude for the stakeholders. It directly impacts sales and indirectly impacts profitability.

· Negative publicity: As per the scope of this study, the negative publicity of the sample was minor or moderate and not at all strong. Thus, the negative publicity was not effective enough to outweigh the effects of positive publicity and advertising.

Conclusively, advertisement not only stimulates and complements publicity, but it also supports increase in profitability and sales.

 My Opinion:

Working previously in sales for 3 years, my takeaway was that it takes much more effort to crack a deal when your potential client has a negative impression about your product. In my case, this perception was created by word of mouth. Changing their perception and focusing on creating a positive corporate reputation through an influential sales pitch was possible. This is exactly what this study is discussing: “negative publicity does not offset the effects of positive publicity”. In this case, one of the primary reasons is that the weightage/gradation of negative publicity is far lower than that of positive publicity.

It is surprising to see that the effect of advertising is diminishing with the advent of corporate and marketing public relations. We have been taught that there is a very fine line between advertising and public relations and ultimately they are correlated. They also have significantly different effects on company from profitability and reputation standpoint.

After reading this article, I would conclude that advertising and public relation complement each other and should always co-exist. An ad campaign is successful only when it can generate customer- generated content.

Also, in my opinion, the scope of this study was very limited and could have been widened to other sectors. The research evaluated only the computer technology sector. The researchers could also analyze recent data which could have assisted other technology sector firms in improving their marketing communication efforts. Social media is an integral aspect from a corporate reputation standpoint. Back in 2000-2003 social media publicity was not that common, hence the current application of these results is restricted.

 - Rubai Soni

This article was published in the Journal of Advertising Research, December 2015 edition. The authors are Harlan E. Spotts, Marc G. Weinberger and Michelle E. Weinberger. The link to the article is 

There was a recorded 1,361,755 active duty personnel in the United States Armed Forces in December of 2013. Although service men and women do so much to protect our great country, themselves and their families are often overlooked. Many families experience heartache when their loved ones are deployed and many military personnel face unemployment upon their return. Walmart took notice of these families and with the help of public relations agency BRG Communications, Walmart launched Walmart’s Holiday Salute campaign Veterans Day of 2013.

The campaign had three objectives: · Increase awareness of Walmart’s support of the military through donations to two well-respected military nonprofits, Operation Homefront and Fisher House and also increase awareness of Walmart’s efforts of hiring 100,000 veterans during the first 12 months of active duty by 2015. · Encourage consumer engagement and support amongst Walmart customers, associates, and military affiliated families during the holiday season. · Strengthen Walmart’s brand reputation.

The challenge of the campaign was encompassing all of Walmart’s military support efforts under one campaign. Currently, Walmart has Welcome Home Commitment, Military Family Promise, and Hiring our Heroes efforts that they included under the Holiday Salute umbrella.

Walmart decided to launch the campaign Veterans Day as a way to engage the target audience. They hired Ellie Kay, well-known mother and wife of military personnel and America’s Military Family Expert, as their spokesperson. They developed a wall of honor website for people to submit posts of service members and veterans. The campaign used ‘Giving Tuesday’ as an opportunity to get donations for Operation Homefront and Fisher House. Through Walmart and Operation Homefront, 500 service members were able to come home during the holidays to be with their families.

Research for Walmart’s Holiday Salute Campaign

Primary: Walmart conducted a survey of 300 consumers to determine their awareness, perceptions and opinions of US service members and military families. The survey found that 1 in 3 Americans wanted to give back during the holiday season and 2 in 5 thought it was extremely important to give back to the military. 

Secondary: Walmart and BRG Communications used existing research from Operation Homefront, which looked at the difficulties of veteran and military families.  

Evaluation 

Overview of Hallmark’s #birthdayfail

We live in the age lost communication, where we wish people a happy birthday by writing on their “wall”. This works well for your average millennial, but does not bode well for Hallmark, the largest manufacturer of greeting cards in the United States.

To combat this issue head-on, Hallmark teamed up with FleishmanHillard to target socially savvy moms to remind them that sending a physical greeting card is the most meaningful way to say “happy birthday”.

The overall goal of the campaign was to get people back into the stores to send cards to their nearest and dearest. They did this by launching the #birthdayfail campaign based on the #fail humor that was popular on social media with video, texts, and pictures. Using social media, the campaign would use the same tactics to reach young mothers using humor.

With a pre-existing in store product line with the already popular Duck Dynasty franchise, which is the number one reality show in cable television history, the social effort kicked off with four YouTube videos featuring Jase Robertson and Uncle Si. These humorous videos were leveraged across social media with accompanying paid, earned, shared, and owned content such as images, social graphics, Twitter promotions, and integrated blog posts.

This approach was a change from Hallmark’s usual public relations plan, which was part of the goal. Hallmark and FleishmanHillard wanted to disrupt the consumer in the social space with humorous content and remind them that any birthday greeting other than a Hallmark card was a #birthdayfail.

Research for Hallmark’s #birthdayfail

FleishmanHillard did primary research regarding the behaviors of Hallmark’s target consumer in traditional and social media. They found that the target audience for the #birthdayfail campaign are moms with kids in the house, and that this audience is more likely to use humor to connect with others on their birthdays. Secondary research found that socially savvy consumers poked fun as Hallmark’s overly sentimental tone.

To ensure their delivery method was appropriate, FleishmanHillard collected secondary data from Custom Content Council, TMG Custom Media, and Hanley-Wood Business Media to support that content marketing and custom content was the correct approach. Results showed that 61% of consumers are more likely to buy from a company that delivers custom content.

Evaluative Research

The campaign, which lasted three months, was performing above benchmark completion rates just a few weeks into the launch in regard to paid media spaces like the Duck Dynasty videos. Within a week of being posted, these videos ranged in views from 59,000 to around 140,000 views, according to Digiday.com.

By its completion, the campaign generated 4,136 social media placements and 48,508,108 total earned impressions as reported to the Public Relations Society of America. FleishmanHillard reported the following social media numbers:

379,242 total views

10,193 total shares

78,115 total likes

3,631 total comments

Unfortunately, with Hallmark being a privately owned company, specific sales numbers were not shared, but it was reported that this campaign did significantly impact birthday card sales in a positive way.

Evaluation

Overall, this was a very strong, out-of-the-box, campaign. Going against a brand’s traditional voice was a great way to accomplish the goal of disrupting their target audience’s social media activity.

Though not sited in PRSA’s campaign summary, Duck Dynasty’s fourth season premier (at the campaign’s inception) became the number one nonfiction cable series telecast in history with 11.8 million viewers, over half of which were between the ages of 25 and 54. The stars of Hallmark’s #birthdayfail videos, Jase and Si, also have combined Twitter following of nearly 2 million people, with Duck Dynasty itself having 7 million likes on Facebook. It is not discussed how this audience was was considered in the development of the campaign, or how they benefited from cross promotion, utilizing this built in audience.