Nothing Beats the Real Thing. It's that simple.
I read a very interesting article on www.warc.com today. It was an article on social media fatigue. They quoted a Gartner research that revealed that about 24% of respondents across 11 markets use their favourite social network sites less often than they initially did. Not surprising.
I mean, what kind of a person would rather watch AR Rehman (or the Black Eyed Peas or anyone else) on a live stream than go to a concert?! The same holds true for practically any experience - from watching a Wimbledon match to catching up with a friend. Even clients would rather call for a face-to-face meeting than close deals over a video conference.
There is an undeniable magic to live, personal experiences that can not be matched in the virtual world. The euphoria of being inches away from star players at a cricket match; the adrenaline rush from being in an actual, physical race etc. can only be experienced in a physical space and time. So what makes below-the-line experiences evergreen?
1. The senses: The more senses an experience involves, the more likely it is to stay with you, longer. I would even go as far as to say the impact of an experience grows exponentially with the every additional sensory involvement. When I watch something being cooked on Youtube, for example, just because I can't smell it, does not mean that I don't smell anything. In fact while my attention is directed towards what I am watching, my sense of smell is exposed to whatever is in my physical environment. So, not only does my virtual experience 'miss out' on the chance to include the sense of smell, it also faces the threat of that sense becoming a distraction to the 'video experience' as a result of whatever olfactory stimulus exists in my physical environment.
2. The sensation of 'surround': If I am immersed in my experience in such a way that I am physically surrounded by it, it creates a much more lasting impact than if all the stimulus is received from in front of me. When I interact with a screen, what I see, hear and feel, is most likely unidirectional. It is all right there in front of me. In a 'real' experience, everything surrounding me is the experience
3. Size matters: Close on the heels of the 'surround' argument, is the the logic that size matters. A virtual experience is limited to the size of the screen with which I am interacting. A physical experience is all around me in it's actual size. There is no escaping it!
4. 'Real' is more 'social': A 'real' or 'physical' experience needs me to be more physically involved than in a virtual experience. Most often, a physical experience needs me to walk more, talk more, move more and be conscious of the way I carry myself because there are others observing me in a social environment.
Having said all that, virtual, social media has 2 distinct advantages - geographical reach and sheer numbers. But with all the might of both these things...it still does not stand a chance against experiential marketing
I read a very interesting article on www.warc.com today. It was an article on social media fatigue. They quoted a Gartner research that revealed that about 24% of respondents across 11 markets use their favourite social network sites less often than they initially did. Not surprising.
I mean, what kind of a person would rather watch AR Rehman (or the Black Eyed Peas or anyone else) on a live stream than go to a concert?! The same holds true for practically any experience - from watching a Wimbledon match to catching up with a friend. Even clients would rather call for a face-to-face meeting than close deals over a video conference.
There is an undeniable magic to live, personal experiences that can not be matched in the virtual world. The euphoria of being inches away from star players at a cricket match; the adrenaline rush from being in an actual, physical race etc. can only be experienced in a physical space and time. So what makes below-the-line experiences evergreen?
1. The senses: The more senses an experience involves, the more likely it is to stay with you, longer. I would even go as far as to say the impact of an experience grows exponentially with the every additional sensory involvement. When I watch something being cooked on Youtube, for example, just because I can't smell it, does not mean that I don't smell anything. In fact while my attention is directed towards what I am watching, my sense of smell is exposed to whatever is in my physical environment. So, not only does my virtual experience 'miss out' on the chance to include the sense of smell, it also faces the threat of that sense becoming a distraction to the 'video experience' as a result of whatever olfactory stimulus exists in my physical environment.
2. The sensation of 'surround': If I am immersed in my experience in such a way that I am physically surrounded by it, it creates a much more lasting impact than if all the stimulus is received from in front of me. When I interact with a screen, what I see, hear and feel, is most likely unidirectional. It is all right there in front of me. In a 'real' experience, everything surrounding me is the experience
3. Size matters: Close on the heels of the 'surround' argument, is the the logic that size matters. A virtual experience is limited to the size of the screen with which I am interacting. A physical experience is all around me in it's actual size. There is no escaping it!
4. 'Real' is more 'social': A 'real' or 'physical' experience needs me to be more physically involved than in a virtual experience. Most often, a physical experience needs me to walk more, talk more, move more and be conscious of the way I carry myself because there are others observing me in a social environment.
Having said all that, virtual, social media has 2 distinct advantages - geographical reach and sheer numbers. But with all the might of both these things...it still does not stand a chance against experiential marketing
No comments:
Post a Comment