Home > advertising campaign, Integration > Is consistency a good thing?

Is consistency a good thing?

Let’s take the latest Orange campaign ‘ good things never end’ as an example.

It was started by a lovely TV ad

Explaining that Orange believes that ‘good things should never end’ hence why they give unlimited texts to any network. Good work.

They also added a iTV piece that starts where the TV execution stops. It could only be accessed by pressing the red button on sky. Here it is.

Which continues the TV execution by describing all the other great things that you get with Orange like free gig tickets… Spectactors can press the key associated with the service on their remote control and be taken to the page detailling the said service.

Great job. Very watchable and entertaining way to showcase a lot of content.

Then came the website. ‘The page that never ends’ that got much buzz and credit in the blogosphere. It’s essentially an online adaptation of that interactive TV, using the same visuals and concepts. You can scroll down the ad, interacts with some of the elements, and get a lot of information about Orange different services. The clever bit that the page, well, never ends, you can never scroll down to the bottom of the page.

Here’s the page

They even created some online advertising to drive traffic to this page.

Again, it’s all lovely stuff there, great interactive piece of content.

They’ve done an amazing job. Each piece in its on right is fantastic. But I sometimes think that consistency has been achieved with the executions rather than the bigger campaign idea (good things should never end) and that a trick has been missed not to engage consumers more deeply with it on other channels. I might be wrong.

  1. December 6, 2007 at 3:58 pm

    I might not have understood what you mean correctly, but I think that the idea is really what is consistent across the media. In the sense that the concept of “good things never ending” has been executed in its own way across media, appropriate to that medium.

    The website could have just been a looping movie, for example, but instead Poke used the scrolling nature of a webpage as opposed to a time-based metaphor. The rainbow is a consistent visual theme, but other than that the website takes on a very different look to the TV ads.

    Maybe I’m missing what you mean here though?

  2. Digicynic
    December 6, 2007 at 4:47 pm

    Don’t get me wrong. I think the website Poke did is brilliant. The point I was trying to make (maybe not really clearly!) is that the website was a clever online translation of the interactive TV ad Mother created (which is a looping movie).
    That all these pieces were consistent in their executions style (which is a good thing) but that they could have liberated the big idea (good things should never end) to bring something fresh and new to the party on other platforms.
    It’s such a big idea, I thought it was somehow a shame not to engage people with it more in-depth (maybe they did?).
    A good example of what I mean by that is how Nike does it with ‘put it where you want it’ or ‘Joga bonito’, creating a multitude of different content accross different media, all building up the big idea but using different executions on different medium to do so.
    Does that make more sense?

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: