|So, the World Cup has just had what you might call its first Oreo moment, in the shape of Luis Suarez's alleged bite mark on Giorgio Chiellini, the subsequent social media explosion (there were two million tweets mentioning Suarez in the hour after the game), and numerous brands' social media attempts to exploit the opportunity. Given all the pre-tournament buzz about Brazil 2014 being the first real-time World Cup and the readiness of brands to leverage moments like Suarez's bite real time, it's interesting to take a look at what actually happened. Here are five things I noticed in the 24 hours since the incident.|
1. Despite the significant number of brands who attempted to leverage #Suarez, very few achieved mass levels of engagement. Here are the two most successful I've come across so far.
|(Translation: Hi Luis Suarez, if you are still hungry, come take a bite out of a Big Mac).|
|I doubt that either of them will win any awards for creativity, or humour, any time soon. There are more creative, and much funnier executions out there. This, by Bud Light, for example.|
|But look at the number of re-tweets compared to McDonald's and Nando's, and most importantly the time it took to publish the tweet after the event. Bud Light, like most, didn't react quickly enough. McDonald's and Nando's did. And in real time, above all, speed wins.|
See also Evander Holyfield. Fast (over an hour quicker than Bud Light), relevant and funny.
|2. Talking of funny, there was some absolutely brilliant stuff out there created by outliers, but none of it went big because they didn't have the distribution skills or the platforms.For brands, crowd-sourcing from outliers is an untapped opportunity in real time.|
3. By far the majority of the brands that did try to gatecrash the party were non-sponsors. Search for Suarez on Twitter, or check out the innumerable lists of Suarez executions that are flying around in the media, and you'll see what I mean.Bye bye Bavaria et al. Ambush marketing has gone social and real-time.4. Of the sponsors, McDonald's was the big winner, but most of the sponsors didn't play, in all likelihood because they couldn't come up with something good enough fast enough that was relevant to their brands. All those
4. Of the sponsors, McDonald's was the big winner, but most of the sponsors didn't play, in all likelihood because they couldn't come up with something good enough fast enough that was relevant to their brands. All those brand World Cup war-rooms would have been an interesting place to be last night. But I noticed several of the bigger brands buying Suarez as a term on Twitter.
If you can't think your way in, buy your way in. Fair enough, but nowhere near as good as becoming part of the conversation organically.
5. There was a lot of hilarity in the sports marketing ecosystem when Listerine, a World Cup sponsor via Johnson & Johnson's FIFA deal, unveiled its #PowerToYourMouth campaign, in particular this quote from a senior Listerine exec in the launch PR:
"The World Cup is a good opportunity to get people to reconsider the importance of oral care beyond cleaning your teeth, and to consider what a mouth goes through."
Really? But when the Suarez incident happened last night, the first thing I thought of was #PowerToYourMouth and the gilt-edged real-time opportunity it presented for Listerine, and I tweeted as much.
Now I can't say that what Listerine came up with really did justice to the opportunity, especially compared to the likes of McDonalds:
|But I loved the fact that they took the time and trouble to reply to my tweet with a customised line.|
|Now that's great marketing.|