As you know, doing more with less is a regular refrain in PR and marketing. As such, we regularly bring you tips about doing things on a tight budget. One thing we speak about often is that brands can create video relatively inexpensively using a mobile phone with a good camera, a tripod, a microphone and lights (PRN, June 27, 2016). We realize some brand communicators may be skeptical about this and, as a result, eschew video altogether. Considering the statistics presented below, this might be a poor choice.
Still, shouldn’t top-flight brands with the budget, equipment and knowledge to produce expensive videos obtain better results than those using a mobile phone and a tripod?
Take Food Network, for example, known largely for television, but with strong inroads in the online and social spaces. Food can afford to make showy live digital videos, what with its television studios, video equipment and big-name talent.
VP, Social Media/Convergent Content, Food Network
In fact, it did all that. Unfortunately, things didn’t work too well. Food has changed course and now is having success in the live video space. Here’s what it’s learned:
1. Live Video Is Not TV: For a holiday campaign a few years ago, Food “treated [live streaming] as live TV,” devoting extensive hours, planning time and monetary and human resources to producing six Facebook Live sessions, says Kate Gold, VP, social media and convergent content. The ROI “wasn’t there,” she says, noting Food’s heavy investment.
The key: TV and digital have their own formats. Instead of TV’s competition shows, Food has adopted what it calls “hands and pans” videos, “where you literally see just the hands of a food preparer, the food and the pans used to make a dish.” It also is producing informal, “spur-of-the-moment videos…and videos people can watch without the sound being on.” This relates to lesson 2:
2. Every Second Is Someone’s First Impression: Initially, Food thought it needed celebrity hosts for its live videos. For one about making lobster rolls, it engaged Luke Holden of Luke’s Lobsters to narrate and host. The video received 100K views and 4K live views. Another Food video showing only Luke’s hands making lobster rolls, and with his narration, did 10 times better. It received 1.2 million views and 8K peak live viewers. “What we learned is we had to concentrate on the food…and make every single second count…since people can’t rewind on a live video. They must be able to know what’s going on no matter when they enter.”
3. Visuals Take Precedence:“We thought our live videos with talent would knock it out of the park.” The first few live videos were interviews with celebrity chefs, “essentially talking heads,” a relatively low-cost endeavor. Without viewers having the sound on, though, this format didn’t work well. Where celeb chefs succeed, she says, is when content featuring them is edited down to short clips, embedded into a non-live video. For example, instead of having a celebrity chef offer 10 steps for making a certain dish, footage of a chef will offer a few seconds of color during a native video.
4. Keep It Simple:“I can’t stress this enough…anytime we’ve tried really hard to be successful [on a live video], it has failed.” Food used three hosts at various NYC locations to conduct a bartender’s competition on live video. The video didn’t perform well. “It concentrated too much on people and…didn’t provide enough value to the audience.”
Another tip: Concentrate on a single message in a video. “We’ve found if there are too many messages in a video” it’s less likely to be shared. Why? “It’s hard for people to discern” which message to share with friends.
5. Experiment With Days and Times:Again, early on Food used its TV experience to schedule live videos. And again, it learned a lesson. It turns out prime time can be great for television, but not for social videos. “Evening hours” that can be graveyards for TV, such as Friday nights, “actually work well for our videos.” In addition, Gold says live video might not work for your audience. “People are so used to watching when they want to watch…live video rarely performs well” for some brands.
Still think big-time resources and extensive video production assets equal success in social video? We hope we’ve provided you with some food for thought about that.
Seeing Is Believing
- When 2017 is over, it’s expected that video will account for nearly 75% of online traffic. (Mary Meeker, Kleiner Perkins, May 2017)
- By 2019 video will represent more than 80% of all internet traffic; for the U.S. it will be 85%+. (Cisco, June 2017)
- Your brand is 53% more likely to show up on a Google search if you have a video embedded on your site. (Google, 2016)
Takeaways
1. Video is not TV. Each medium has its own characteristics.
2. Before you begin your video efforts, know your goals and the characteristics and viewing habits of your audience. Tactics will flow from there.
3. Make sure your visuals help visitors know where they are immediately since many view social videos without sound.
CONTACT: @katefgold