THE CAMPAIGN
A fake launch event in Seattle, at the Space Needle, last June (2012) marked the start of the campaign. As you can see in the video, something went terribly wrong at the event...
The video was spread on Twitter with the hashtag #ShellFail and went viral. It also has a dubstep remix!
A fake Shell website (Arcticisready) was also created by the activist group.
On the site, the new (fake) Shell campaign 'Let's go', which was all about new drilling actions in the Arctic, was being promoted and users were given the opportunity to contribute by creating ads like these:
On the site, the new (fake) Shell campaign 'Let's go', which was all about new drilling actions in the Arctic, was being promoted and users were given the opportunity to contribute by creating ads like these:
A kids section with the game Angry Bergs (obviously recalling Angry Birds) was also available.
A bogus Twitter account (@ShellisPrepared) was also created.
The tweets looked rather suspicious and often unprofessional, so it wasn't difficult to understand who was actually tweeting...
Greenpeace admitted the campaign was launched by them and now that the hoax is public, the environmentalist group is spreading a new trend - #TellShell - in order to launch its last tactic - a competition.
Twitter users who tweet the hashtag will have the chance to win a t-shirt.
Shell sent out news releases stating that the company was considering legal action. However, it seems that the oil giant is taking its time to respond to the 'attack'.
MY OPINION
As the French would say... fantastique! The idea and the implementation are simply brilliant. Excellent way to 'undermine a personality' (Cwalina et al. 2011). I think there is no doubt: not-for-profit and activist PR can be as creative and as effective as for-profit PR. The level of professionalism in a number of cases is equal, as previously demonstrated by the performance of Greenpeace, WWF, Save The Children, Unicef, and many more organisations. Shell will struggle to react to this clever strategy.
(All images in this post are screenshots I took because I suspect the ads will be removed shortly).
Reference:
Cwalina, W., Falkowski, A., Newman, B.I., 2011. Political Marketing: Theoretical and Strategic Foundations. Warsaw: Sharpe Incoroporated.
Informative post, but I would love to have seen you write a longer commentary as that to me is the most interesting part. And it's also a great conversation starter. Just a suggestion to have in mind when writing your next post (:
ReplyDeleteThe issue of professionalism and non-profit PR - I really wish you would have expanded upon that some.
I too thought the Twitter campaign was brilliant as it was funny and shareable. However, I found the first part of the campaign somewhat ethically dubious (especially considering many believed it which brings up the question of where the line is between a stunt and deceit). You yourself mention "undermining a personality" which we were taught is a below the belt technique. So is it imperative to get dirty when going against a dirty player?
I agree that it was a cleverly executed strategy as it hit the right notes. Thanks for the useful breakdown of the campaign, I hadn't been aware of all of its elements.
Thank you for your feedback! I was trying to keep my posts as short as possible because I thought people could get bored! I'll certainly start to write more of my opinion, thanks. It's this kind of feedback I was looking for, thanks! As for the ethical part, totally agreed! It is a below the belt technique for sure. And to be fair, Greenpeace uses this kind of technique quite a lot... Remember the campaign against KitKat? Again, they modified the brand logo to undermine the Nestlé personality... So yeah... very clever but a bit incorrect!
Delete