As Grip’s resident mobile marketing expert a number of colleagues and clients have asked me on numerous occasions for my thoughts on Augmented Reality or “AR” as those in know call it. In particular, is it the right medium to use and if so, how?  My response is typically – perhaps infuriatingly – similar in every case: “it depends.”

Here’s why.

Augmented reality when used correctly can provide a truly immersive, fun and entertaining experience for the user. Whether looking at a virtual reality view of the world through your mobile device, engaging with a product in 3D via a in-store kiosk or interacting with cool and exciting characters through OOH advertising on the big screen, AR can provide a lot of value and buzz. Of course there is also a downside to utilizing AR. The cost of production can be high particularly when compared to the net value. An augmented reality experience via mobile device requires the creation and development of a mobile app at potentially great expense for each platform used (e.g. iPhone, Android, Blackberry). Similarly, a kiosk or OOH augmented reality display can also be expensive to design and develop for consumer view. After cost has been factored in, what about value? Does the augmented reality experience provide a one-time only novelty interaction for the consumer or does it provide greater long term utility and relevance? How do we measure ROI?

Regardless of the pros or cons of going with an AR experience, here are a few examples of AR that range from the good to the bad & ugly (literally):

Good = Stella Artois, Lego and National Geographic
The Stella Artois Le Bar Guide mobile app provides great utility for consumers and fans of Stella Artois who are looking for a bar or pub that stocks their favourite beverage. Simply launch the mobile app and scan your surrounding area to find the nearest pub and get directions to go there.

Lego has created a fun in-store kiosk experience that enables consumers to easily see what the Lego product will look like when fully built. Consumers just hold the box up to the kiosk camera and a virtual view of the product in animated 3D suddenly appears to entertain and dazzle the viewer.

National Geographic has created a simple method for larger groups of consumers to view an AR experience all at once and enjoy the magic of wild animals and pre historic creatures coming to life before their eyes.  Consumers who stood on a special spot on the floor would trigger the start of the AR experience on the big screen for all to see.

Bad = Mosquito

Swatting imaginary mosquito’s in your home through your mobile device is likely not the best use of an augmented reality experience designed to engage and entertain.  This execution lacks any of the game play or entertainment needed to captivate someone beyond a few seconds of interacting with it.

Ugly = Makeup Girl Utilizing an augmented reality kiosk for women to see what makeup products will look like on their face before actually buying them would appear to have strong merit.  However, this kiosk turns “ugly” in more ways then one when the end result makes the women look worse than they did before trying the product.

All this to say that there are a couple questions you should ask yourself before jumping into the AR bandwagon. The first being whether you have a legitimate utility or insight that you can uniquely tap into, and the second being whether your execution is up to snuff.
The thrill of augmented reality is the secondary dimension to reality that it offers. There’s an inherent magic to the technology that must be respected. If that magic is abused for the purposes of reactive marketing, well – things can get ugly.

Google visited Grip a couple weeks ago and left us with a lovely parting gift: the Google 2011 Creative Canvas. This book is full of the most memorable campaigns of 2011 – each of which used Google platforms as their canvas. We use their four categories as a helpful guide for our own ideation sessions:

• Tell Stories. Google’s examples from 2011 include variations of the surprise-and-delight site takeover like Peugeot’s Race Course or Heineken’s use of Facebook Connect to incorporate your friends’ faces into their party video
• Empower and Inform. Nike gives immersive Lacrosse info on the field in freeze-frame
• Invite Expression. Fast and Furious 5 used Google Maps to race through actual streets and let you design your own course on home roads
• Evoke Emotion. Tropicana used YouTube Annotations to promote their gazpacho soup

Google also included great little Google facts throughout the book, for example

• New vehicle buyers spend 19 hours shopping for a vehicle; 11 of those hours are online
• The White House uploads 17 videos/week to YouTube
• 7 years of new video are posted to YouTube each day

From maps to measurement tools, Google has provided an amazing suite of tools for creative use. Judging from their examples (and valuable statistical insights), the opportunities for creative, resonant work are endless. Anybody have other great creative YouTube, Google+ or Rich Media examples to share?

An illustration from graphic designer Eric Neale, outlining the “two types” of people in advertising.

Via: Eric Neal’s website

Since the dawn of time, artists, musicians, and designers have been known to steal borrow ideas from one another. Even Mr. Picasso said that “good artists copy but great artists steal.” Sure we all benefit from the output of those who have walked similar paths, but where is the line drawn?

H&M recently found out.

Recently the hot clothing retailer was busted on what appears to be blatant design theft. A couple weeks ago, artist Tori LaConsay was notified by her friends that H&M UK was selling a design that was eerily close to the painting she created for her hometown. Tori’s artwork and H&M’s line of similarly-printed housewares were a little too close for comfort, so she did what any annoyed artist would do; she contacted H&M to find some answers.

This was H&M’s response:

We employ an independent team of over 100 designers. We can assure you that this design has not been influenced by your work and that no copyright has been infringed.

This particular response didn’t satisfy Tori. So she didn’t stop there. Even her friends got involved. At one point, an email was sent to H&M’s customer complaint department requesting compensation for Tori’s design. Until such action is taken, Tori’s friend said, they would no longer shop at H&M.

H&M’s response: “We are sorry you will no longer be shopping with us.”

Any comment on the H&M facebook page was deleted and swept under the rug, but I think it’s fairly obvious what has taken place here. Luckily after much pressure from their fan group, H&M finally relented and posted this:

Note the number of “likes,” “comments” and “shares.” Transparency was something the fan group clearly appreciated.

Was it wrong for H&M to borrow a concept from a young artist? Well, per Mr. Picasso, that all depends on whether you think that the communication arts should – or can – always rely on entirely novel, unique concepts. Chances are, they don’t. Everything is borrowed. Everything is a permutation. In this case, the content was a direct lift. But interestingly enough, at no point did those defending the artists decry the use of the artwork in an H&M ad. They condemned the fact that H&M wasn’t transparent with their use – and therefore with their compensation. So the issue becomes one of attribution and collaboration.

Brands and community managers would do well to constantly recall that the Internet is all-seeing, all-knowing. Collaboration with young artists shouldn’t be considered a threat to brand voice or novelty, but rather an opportunity. In this case, H&M revealed the immense opportunity that brands have to elevate unknown, willing artists into the public eye. The big guys help the little guys. Collaboration creates something exciting and new. The audience appreciates the brand’s honesty, and the artist’s success story. Everyone wins.

From the moment it entered our homes, we have looked to television as a staple medium of news and entertainment. For advertisers it was a boon – the game-changing placement opportunity before the dawn of the web.

The two mediums have been circling each other for some time, and it appears that they have finally gotten married. Totally Amp’d, an app-based TV show, is excusing itself from the network model to pursue the mobile generation. Totally Amp’d is, in fact, a teen sitcom designed for exclusive streaming through smartphones and tablets. The show follows a group of five teens, as they dream their way into becoming the next big pop group. Alongside the story, their kid/tween-aged audience are offered a suite of immersive tools that allow them to enter the world and play at becoming a music producer, stylist or videographer.

Content distribution channels have extricated themselves from the network model for a while now. iTunes has been selling existing TV shows for years, news networks have been streaming their broadcasts, and Netflix has been offering syndicated content. Even web-based series have developed their own “networks” with Revision 3, Funnyordie.com and College Humor. But where does this leave advertisers? Totally Amp’d completely removes networks from the picture, and, being a paid app, it also pretty much eliminates dependence on advertising dollars. Instead of offering up spots, advertising has been forced to reconcile or reconsider its role. In some cases, product placements, sponsorship credits, or co-creation programs.

Is building a pay-walled garden troubling to the ad world? Only time will tell. But I believe much like everything else, the content will be king (as cliche as that sounds.) Innovative or not, if people don’t like the programming, they won’t watch it. So the question becomes how advertisers can capitalize on compelling programming. Should they focus on getting in the door by paying promising content producers for a cameo credit? Or is there greater opportunity in upping the ante on budgets, escaping the confines of :30 storytelling to embrace a brand-focused series of their own? If this new distribution channel changes the game, where is the greatest opportunity?

Not to #humblebrag, but I don’t make a lot of plans in my life. A lot of what I do is often done on a whim. For example, the reason I ended up in advertising is because I read Ogilvy On Advertising and decided to apply to the Humber College copywriting program right before the application deadline. Whims are also the reason why I’m currently taking an introductory improv class at The Second City.

I’ve thought about learning improv on and off for a few years, but it wasn’t until a friend asked if I wanted to join him in taking a class that I decided to do it. I had heard that doing improv can help you with a lot of different things: writing, comic timing, public speaking, managing stress — all things that are more or less part of my job. But I was also hoping that it might affect my life outside of work. After all, aren’t we all dying to become that loud improv/actor-type who always seems like they’re “on” no matter where they are?

Sorry, that was my token cynicism kicking in. That’s another thing I was hoping might be affected by taking improv. It can be easy to get cynical in advertising when your ideas are shot down or something you thought was great doesn’t end up happening. And personally I don’t think it does you any good. At least, it doesn’t seem to be helping me. So it was interesting that the first concept we were taught in the class was “Yes, and.” It’s the idea that in improv you always have to be open. You always have to say yes in order for a scene to work. You have to be prepared to say yes no matter what happened before. We were then told that if you embrace this idea in improv, it’ll eventually affect the way you think in other parts of your life.

And has it? So far, I think so. At work, I’m finding myself more willing to just let things happen. There are things you can’t control in advertising, especially as a junior copywriter, but I think it does help to be open. Whether that’s being more open to other people’s ideas, finding the best way to revise work or facing an unexpected challenge.

Aside from being a pretty great stress reliever and a way to force myself to think on my feet, improv is helping me remember there are still plenty of possibilities and opportunities to come when something doesn’t go your way. And I think in advertising that can only be a good thing.

The hotly-anticipated new Muppet movie is being released in theaters today. At first blush, this may not seem like a marketing-related news item. But in many respects, the Muppets may represent one of the biggest marketing stories of the year.

A group of beloved childhood characters in the 70s and 80s, the Muppets seems to fade into relative obscurity for much of the 90s and naughts. That is until Jason Segel and Disney threw their weight behind a new Muppet movie project – and an ambitious, far-reaching media campaign that deliriously (and hilariously) places Muppets everywhere from Twitter to Saturday Night Live to theater anti-cell phone pre-roll ads.

In tribute to the Muppets’ phoenix-like rise back into public consciousness, we present a series of meditations on the subject – from the far reaches of the blogosphere and beyond!

Beakering News – On Twitter, @BreakingNews is a popular source for up-to-the-minute international headlines. Recently, they’ve found a new rival whose tweets are just as salient, and often more poetic.

Before the Muppets: 10 Surreal and Experimental Works by Jim Henson – Jim Henson is known for his work developing Sesame Street, The Muppet Show, Fraggle Rock and others. But there are a number of other creative projects he was involved with that were infused with his trademark humour and voice. Including, of course, his early (dark) commercials for Wilkins Coffee.

Mahna Mahna: How a ditty from a soft-core Italian movie became the Muppets’ catchiest tune – We all know this song. Once we hear it, we hear it for the rest of the week. And we don’t mind it at all. Jingles have nothing on this tune. So – where did it come from? As usual, the answer has its roots in porn.

How social media revived the Muppets - Mashable recently published this great overview of the ways Walt Disney Pictures employed Social Media to revive the Muppet characters (and brand) in anticipation of their new film. Innovative, captivating, and to the exclusion of no channel, the results clearly speak for themselves.

Idea people tend to preface brainstorms with a gleeful refrain of “there are no dumb ideas.”
But when the truly dumb idea creeps out from under the carpet – dressed in Comic Sans evening wear – eyebrows raise, and silence reigns. Dumb ideas are insidious.

In terms of net volume, I believe that I come up with some of the dumbest ideas in the agency. So perhaps I’m biased when I say that I think the dumb idea may be the most important idea of all.

But how does one address a poor, dumb little idea? Do we simply awkwardly ignore it? Or can it serve a higher purpose?

Firstly, addressing the dumb idea lets you work through it. By putting a dumb idea down, and owning it, it lets you actively evaluate it compared to the goals of the project.
By simply making and letting go, you can engage in a creative catharsis.

You never know if there is a sliver of a good idea hidden in a bad idea, either. By laying out the spread of half-baked, unloved, unfinished ideas, someone else may see something valuable in the work you’ve written off.
But finally, there’s a greater, cultural issue with the dumb idea. The dumb idea implies failure. It implies the absence of competence, of cool, and of alchemical magic that creatives cultivate. The act of evaluating dumb idea implies that we might not have the answers yet.

By squashing our dumb ideas too early, or keeping them stowed away like a horrible secret, we close ourselves off to exploration and to productive failure. But culturally, we also close ourselves off to opportunities for growth and play. If we are afraid to explore the entire spectrum of our ideas and interconnections, then we are setting up a culture of narrow perfectionism and safe ideas. And in turn, we set a dangerous expectation for ourselves and others: only perfect ideas, the first time around.

We know that great creative is an evolution, not a revolution. Part of that is starting with dumb ideas — but finishing with fantastic ones.

Are you like me? Do you dress up fancy and spend hours perfecting the moves from Dance Central for Xbox Kinect? Okay, me neither. But French fashion label Lanvin’s cheeky mash-up promoting its Fall 2011 collection found its way to my inbox. And I love it.

The video, which has gone somewhat viral, features models dancing to Pitbull’s “I Know You Want Me” from the perspective of the Kinect. I guess what I love is that it ticks all the boxes fashion marketers deem obligatory in showcasing a collection – perfect models, perfect clothes, opulent/textured setting – but still manages to throw a curve ball. Lanvin is having quite bit of fun here, tapping into to a pop culture phenomenon, while still showcasing their clothing and brand aesthetic with a visual sensibility that’s familiar enough not to break their longstanding, high-end narrative.

All in all, I felt it broke the mold for a fashion brand (that dates back to 1909). And it works.

A game changer? Excuse the pun and tell us what you think.