Megan West(erby)

this video did not go viral

hungryjughead:

Not the first time I’ve heard someone’s head nearly explode over the much-abused term ‘viral video,’ which makes complete sense if you imagine what a VIRAL video would actually be:

Here’s what a viral video would actually be: I receive a link from a friend to watch a hilarious YouTube video of a cat walking on a birthday cake. I click said link. Some malicious code on the page copies itself to my computer. That code continues to replicate across my system files. To make the marketers happy, that video also commandeers my social network profiles and publishes the same link to the hilarious video of a cat walking on a birthday cake. The same code has also corrupted my browser, now any video I want to watch is replaced with the link to the hilarious video of a cat walking on a birthday cake. (someone please write this code)

Viruses are inherently malicious because they disrupt the normal mechanics of a system. Trust me giant global brand, you don’t want to keep calling it a viral video. At some point, people may have different feelings about you huddled in some dark corner engineering viral videos to infect us with some advertising message.  

http://whatconsumesme.com/2009/posts-ive-written/will-i-share-your-branded-content/#ixzz1lkGCxFu5

So what’s the solution?  @whatconsumesme suggests we coin the term “spreadable media,” but really, who wants to walk into a meeting shouting spreadable? You’re either ordering lunch, or something NSFW.

I have never been a fan of calling anything “viral” but I definitely agree on one thing: calling something spreadable probably won’t earn you any points in a pitch meeting. 

7 February 2012 ·