Showing posts with label interactive. Show all posts
Showing posts with label interactive. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Cool Digital Strat Comm

OK, this is really fun. Look at the innovation from marketers at Holiday Inn Express. They found a way to tie into the interest and energy about the primary campaigns with an interactive branding message. You can highlight a candidate and find out how much he or she would have saved by staying at their hotels instead.
This is edging into an area of interactive that tries to get users to play games to keep them on a site and attending to a message. It happens in news too. It also emphasizes viral, not paying to get a message out but making it interesting enough to get people to forward it for you (much as I'm doing here).
Is this effective? Would you share it?

Sunday, September 9, 2007

Interactive on the Surge

Today's New York Times online provides a cool multimedia feature on Iraq. If you're not up to speed on what's at issue as Petraeus and Crocker head to the hill to give their perspectives this week, this is a great place to start. Watch the video overview and then click through each of the neighborhoods to see a list of vital statistics and photo galleries. It's a good companion to the lead feature:
BAGHDAD, Sept. 8 — Seven months after the American-led troop “surge” began, Baghdad has experienced modest security gains that have neither reversed the city’s underlying sectarian dynamic nor created a unified and trusted national government.
If you're seeking a relatively short backgrounder on why these sects battle, TIME magazine had a great one. If you have more time to learn deep background, read Night Draws Near by Anthony Shadid (a Pulitzer Prize winner and graduate of our fine j-school).
One of the principle critiques of American news media (and the audiences that consume their content) centers on an inability to focus on the long ball, to cover complex and lasting stories well. Iraq is certainly in that arena. News organizations are accused of covering any particular battle with aplomb but losing sight of the war overall. Do you agree? As someone in whose name (and with whose money) this war was initiated and is fought, have the news media done enough to help you understand it? (Incidentally, Newsweek had an intriguing piece this week arguing that perhaps you also ought to be forced to fight it.)