Jeg har brugt de sidste par år på at sætte mig selv i situationer, der typisk er meget svære og samtidig farlige i nogen grad. Jeg kom i spjældet -- svært. Jeg arbedede i en kulmine -- farligt. Jeg filmede i krigszoner -- svært og farligt. Og jeg brugte 30 dage på udelukkende at spise dette -- sjovt i starten, lidt svært i midten, meget farligt til slut. Faktisk, det meste af min karriere, har jeg fordybet mig i tilsyneladende forfærdelige situationer, med målet om at prøve at undersøge samfundsmæssige emner på en måde der gør dem indtagende, der gør dem interessante, der forhåbentligt bryder dem ned på en måde der gør dem underholdende og tilgængelige for et publikum. Så da jeg vidste at jeg ville komme her for at holde et TED foredrag, der kiggede på branding og sponsorat verdenen, vidste jeg, at jeg ville gøre noget, der var lidt anderledes.
I have spent the past few years putting myself into situations that are usually very difficult and at the same time somewhat dangerous. I went to prison -- difficult. I worked in a coal mine -- dangerous. I filmed in war zones -- difficult and dangerous. And I spent 30 days eating nothing but this -- fun in the beginning, little difficult in the middle, very dangerous in the end. In fact, most of my career, I've been immersing myself into seemingly horrible situations for the whole goal of trying to examine societal issues in a way that make them engaging, that make them interesting, that hopefully break them down in a way that make them entertaining and accessible to an audience. So when I knew I was coming here to do a TED Talk that was going to look at the world of branding and sponsorship, I knew I would want to do something a little different.
Så som nogle af jer måske har hørt, satte jeg en reklame på eBay for et par uger siden. Jeg sendte nogle Facebook beskeder, nogle Twitter beskeder, og jeg gav mennesker muligheden for at købe rettighederne til at blive nævnt ved mit 2011 TED foredrag. (Latter) Det er rigtigt, et heldigt individ, en virksomhed, for profit eller non-profit, ville få en enestående mulighed -- fordi jeg er sikker på at Chris Anderson ikke vil tillade, at det sker igen -- (Latter) til at købe retten til at blive nævnt til det foredrag I ser lige nu, der på det tidspunkt ikke havde nogen titel. Havde egentlig ikke meget indhold og ikke gav noget hint til hvad emnet faktisk ville være. Så det man fik var dette: Dit navn præsenterer her: Mit TED foredrag, hvor man ikke har nogen ide om hvad emnet er og, afhængigt af indholdet, i sidste ende kunne gå helt i vasken, især hvis jeg får dig eller dit firma, til at se dumme ud ved at gøre dette. Men når det er sagt, er det en virkelig god medie mulighed. (Latter) Ved I hvor mange mennesker, der ser disse TED foredrag? Det er mange. Det er for øvrigt bare en arbejdstitel. (Latter) Så selv med den advarsel, vidste jeg, at nogen ville købe retten til at blive nævnt.
So as some of you may or may not have heard, a couple weeks ago, I took out an ad on eBay. I sent out some Facebook messages, some Twitter messages, and I gave people the opportunity to buy the naming rights to my 2011 TED Talk. (Laughter) That's right, some lucky individual, corporation, for-profit or non-profit, was going to get the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity -- because I'm sure Chris Anderson will never let it happen again -- (Laughter) to buy the naming rights to the talk you're watching right now, that at the time didn't have a title, didn't really have a lot of content and didn't really give much hint as to what the subject matter would actually be. So what you were getting was this: Your name here presents: My TED Talk that you have no idea what the subject is and, depending on the content, could ultimately blow up in your face, especially if I make you or your company look stupid for doing it. But that being said, it's a very good media opportunity. (Laughter) You know how many people watch these TED Talks? It's a lot. That's just a working title, by the way. (Laughter) So even with that caveat, I knew that someone would buy the naming rights.
Hvis man nu havde spurgt mig om det for et år siden, ville jeg ikke med sikkerhed have kunnet fortælle det. Men i det nye projekt som jeg arbejder på, min nye film, undersøger vi marketings- og reklameverden. Og som jeg sagde tidligere, satte jeg mig selv i nogle temmelig forfærdelige situationer i løbet af årene, men intet kunne forberede mig, intet kunne gøre mig klar, til noget så svært eller så farligt som det at gå ind i et rum med disse mennesker. (Latter) Ser I, jeg havde denne ide til en film.
Now if you'd have asked me that a year ago, I wouldn't have been able to tell you that with any certainty. But in the new project that I'm working on, my new film, we examine the world of marketing, advertising. And as I said earlier, I put myself in some pretty horrible situations over the years, but nothing could prepare me, nothing could ready me, for anything as difficult or as dangerous as going into the rooms with these guys. (Laughter) You see, I had this idea for a movie.
(Video) Morgan Spurlock: Det jeg vil gøre er, at jeg vil lave en film udelukkende om product placement, marketing og reklame, hvor hele filmen er finansieret af product placement, marketing og reklamer. Så filmen hedder "The Greatest Movie Ever Sold". Så det der sker i "The Greatest Movie Ever Sold", er at alt fra top til bund, fra start til slut, er branded fra start til slut -- fra den sponsor, der er oven over titlen som man ser i filmen, som er brand X. Dette brand, Qualcomm Stadium, Staples Center ... disse mennesker vil være gift med filmen i al evighed -- for altid. Så filmen udforsker hele denne ide -- (Michael Kassan: Det er overflødigt.) Det er hvad? (MK: Det er overflødigt.) I al evighed, for altid? Jeg er en overflødig person. (MK: Jeg siger det bare.) Det var mere for at pointere det. Det var, "I al evighed. For altid." Men vi nøjes ikke med at have brand X som titel sponsor, vi vil være sikre på at vi sælger hver kategori vi kan i filmen. Så måske sælger vi en sko, og det bliver den bedste sko man nogensinde har gået i ... den bedste bil man nogensinde har kørt i, fra "The Greatest Movie Ever Sold," den bedste drink man nogensinde har drukket, stillet til rådighed af "The Greatest Movie Ever Sold."
(Video) Morgan Spurlock: What I want to do is make a film all about product placement, marketing and advertising, where the entire film is funded by product placement, marketing and advertising. So the movie will be called "The Greatest Movie Ever Sold." So what happens in "The Greatest Movie Ever Sold," is that everything from top to bottom, from start to finish, is branded from beginning to end -- from the above-the-title sponsor that you'll see in the movie, which is brand X. Now this brand, the Qualcomm Stadium, the Staples Center ... these people will be married to the film in perpetuity -- forever. And so the film explores this whole idea -- (Michael Kassan: It's redundant.) It's what? (MK: It's redundant.) In perpetuity, forever? I'm a redundant person. (MK: I'm just saying.) That was more for emphasis. It was, "In perpetuity. Forever." But not only are we going to have the brand X title sponsor, but we're going to make sure we sell out every category we can in the film. So maybe we sell a shoe and it becomes the greatest shoe you ever wore ... the greatest car you ever drove from "The Greatest Movie Ever Sold," the greatest drink you've ever had, courtesy of "The Greatest Movie Ever Sold."
Xavier Kochhar: Så ideen er, ud over bare at vise, at brandsene er en del af ens liv, men at få dem til at finansiere filmen? (MS: Få dem til at finansiere filmen.)
Xavier Kochhar: So the idea is, beyond just showing that brands are a part of your life, but actually get them to finance the film? (MS: Get them to finance the film.)
MS: Og faktisk vise dem hele processen om hvordan det virker. Målet med denne film er gennemskuelighed. Man kommer til at se det hele finde sted i denne film. Så det er hele konceptet, hele filmen, fra start til slut. Og jeg ville elske at CEG kunne hjælpe med at gøre det til virkelighed.
MS: And actually we show the whole process of how does it work. The goal of this whole film is transparency. You're going to see the whole thing take place in this movie. So that's the whole concept, the whole film, start to finish. And I would love for CEG to help make it happen.
Robert Friedman: Det er sjovt, fordi når jeg først hører det, er det den ultimative respekt til et publikum.
Robert Friedman: You know it's funny, because when I first hear it, it is the ultimate respect for an audience.
Guy: Jeg ved dog ikke hvor modtagelige mennesker vil være overfor det.
Guy: I don't know how receptive people are going to be to it, though.
XK: Har I et perspektiv .. jeg vil ikke bruge "angrebsvinkel" fordi det har en negativ konnotation -- men ved I hvordan dette vil udspille sig? (MS: Ingen anelse.)
XK: Do you have a perspective -- I don't want to use "angle" because that has a negative connotation -- but do you know how this is going to play out? (MS: No idea.)
David Cohn: Hvor mange penge kræver det at gøre dette?
David Cohn: How much money does it take to do this?
MS: 1,5 million. (DC: Okay.)
MS: 1.5 million. (DC: Okay.)
John Kamen: Jeg tror at du får svært ved at mødes med dem, men jeg mener det bestemt er værd at forfølge et par store, virkelig åbenlyse brands.
John Kamen: I think that you're going to have a hard time meeting with them, but I think it's certainly worth pursuing a couple big, really obvious brands.
XK: Hvem ved, til den tid filmen udkommer, vil vi måske ligne en flok lallende idioter.
XK: Who knows, maybe by the time your film comes out, we look like a bunch of blithering idiots.
MS: Hvad tror du reaktionen vil være?
MS: What do you think the response is going to be?
Stuart Ruderfer: Reaktionen vil for det meste være "nej."
Stuart Ruderfer: The responses mostly will be "no."
MS: Men er det en svært ide at sælge på grund af filmen, eller svær at sælge på grund af mig?
MS: But is it a tough sell because of the film or a tough sell because of me?
JK: Begge dele.
JK: Both.
MS: ... Hvilket betyder at det ikke er så optimistisk. Så, sir, kan du hjælpe mig? Jeg har brug for hjælp.
MS: ... Meaning not so optimistic. So, sir, can you help me? I need help.
MK: Jeg kan hjælpe dig.
MK: I can help you.
MS: Okay. (MK: Godt.) Fedt.
MS: Okay. (MK: Good.) Awesome.
MK: Vi skal regne ud hvilke brands det skal være.
MK: We've gotta figure out which brands.
MS: Ja. (MK: Det er udfordingen.) Når man ser på de mennesker du handler med ...
MS: Yeah. (MK: That's the challenge.) When you look at the people you deal with ..
MK: Vi har nogle steder vi kan gå hen. (MS: Okay.) Sluk for kameraet.
MK: We've got some places we can go. (MS: Okay.) Turn the camera off.
MS: Jeg troede "Sluk for kameraet" betød, "Lad os have en samtale uden kamera på." Det viste sig at det i virkeligheden betyder, "Vi vil ikke have noget med din film at gøre."
MS: I thought "Turn the camera off" meant, "Let's have an off-the-record conversation." Turns out it really means, "We want nothing to do with your movie."
MS: Og uden videre, en efter en, forsvandt alle disse virksomheder pludseligt. Ingen af dem ville have noget med denne film at gøre. Jeg blev forbavset. De ville slet ikke have noget med dette projekt at gøre. Og jeg blev imponeret, fordi jeg troede at hele konceptet, ideen om reklamering, var at få ens produkt ud til så mange mennesker som muligt, til at få så mange mennesker som muligt til at se det. Specielt i nutidens verden, denne skæring mellem nye medier og gamle medier og det opdelte medie landskab, er ikke ideen til at få den nye omtalte udtryksmåde det får bragt det budskab til masserne? Nej, det var det jeg tænkte.
MS: And just like that, one by one, all of these companies suddenly disappeared. None of them wanted anything to do with this movie. I was amazed. They wanted absolutely nothing to do with this project. And I was blown away, because I thought the whole concept, the idea of advertising, was to get your product out in front of as many people as possible, to get as many people to see it as possible. Especially in today's world, this intersection of new media and old media and the fractured media landscape, isn't the idea to get that new buzz-worthy delivery vehicle that's going to get that message to the masses? No, that's what I thought.
Men problemet var, ser I, at min ide havde en fatal fejl, og fejlen var dette. Nej, det var faktisk overhovedet ikke fejlen. Det havde overhovedet ikke været et problem. Dette ville have været fint. Men det dette billede repræsenterer var problemet. Se, når man laver en Google billedsøgning på gennemskuelighed, dette er -- (Latter) (Bifald) Dette er et af de første billeder der dukker op. Så jeg kan godt lide den måde du tænker på, Sergey Brin. Nej. (Latter) Dette var problemet: gennemskuelighed -- fri fra påskud eller bedrageri; nemt opdaget eller gennemskuet; forstået med lethed; karakteriseret ved synlighed eller informations tilgængelighed, specielt bekymrende forretningsskik -- den sidste replik sandsynligvis værende det største problem. Ser I, vi hører meget om gennemskuelighed disse dage. Vores politikere siger det, vores præsident siger det, selv vores administrerende direktører siger det. Men når det pludseligt skal blive til virkelighed, ændrer noget sig pludseligt. Men hvorfor? Men, gennemskuelighed er skræmmende -- (Brøl) ligesom den mærkelige, stadig-brølende bjørn. (Latter) Det er uforudsigeligt -- (Musik) (Latter) ligesom denne mærkelige markvej. Og det er også meget risikabelt. (Latter) Hvilke andre ting er risikable? At spise en skål Cool Whip. (Latter) Det er meget risikabelt.
But the problem was, you see, my idea had one fatal flaw, and that flaw was this. Actually no, that was not the flaw whatsoever. That wouldn't have been a problem at all. This would have been fine. But what this image represents was the problem. See, when you do a Google image search for transparency, this is --- (Laughter) (Applause) This is one of the first images that comes up. So I like the way you roll, Sergey Brin. No. (Laughter) This is was the problem: transparency -- free from pretense or deceit; easily detected or seen through; readily understood; characterized by visibility or accessibility of information, especially concerning business practices -- that last line being probably the biggest problem. You see, we hear a lot about transparency these days. Our politicians say it, our president says it, even our CEO's say it. But suddenly when it comes down to becoming a reality, something suddenly changes. But why? Well, transparency is scary -- (Roar) like that odd, still-screaming bear. (Laughter) It's unpredictable -- (Music) (Laughter) like this odd country road. And it's also very risky. (Laughter) What else is risky? Eating an entire bowl of Cool Whip. (Laughter) That's very risky.
Da jeg begyndte at snakke med virksomheder og fortælle dem at vi ville fortælle denne historie, og de sagde, "Nej, vi vil have dig til at fortælle en historie. Vi vil have dig til at fortælle en historie, men vi vil bare fortælle vores historie." Se, da jeg var barn og min far fangede mig i at fortælle en løgn -- og der sender han mig et blik som han sendte mig ofte -- ville han sige, "Søn, der er tre sider til alle historier. Der er din historie, der er min historie og der er den rigtige historie." Ser I, med denne film ville vi fortælle den rigtige historie. Men med kun en virksomhed, et bureau der var villig til at hjælpe mig -- og det er kun fordi jeg kendte John Bond og Richard Kirshenbaum igennem flere år -- jeg blev klar over at jeg skulle klare mig selv, jeg skulle fjerne mellemmanden og gå til virksomhederne selv med hele mit team. Så det man pludselig begynder at forstå -- eller hvad jeg begyndte at forstå -- er at når man begynder at have samtaler med disse virksomheder, er ideen om at forstå ens brand et universelt problem.
Now when I started talking to companies and telling them that we wanted to tell this story, and they said, "No, we want you to tell a story. We want you to tell a story, but we just want to tell our story." See, when I was a kid and my father would catch me in some sort of a lie -- and there he is giving me the look he often gave me -- he would say, "Son, there's three sides to every story. There's your story, there's my story and there's the real story." Now you see, with this film, we wanted to tell the real story. But with only one company, one agency willing to help me -- and that's only because I knew John Bond and Richard Kirshenbaum for years -- I realized that I would have to go on my own, I'd have to cut out the middleman and go to the companies myself with all of my team. So what you suddenly started to realize -- or what I started to realize -- is that when you started having conversations with these companies, the idea of understanding your brand is a universal problem.
(Video) MS: Jeg har venner der laver store, enorme Hollywood film, og jeg har venner der laver små uafhængige film som jeg laver. Og disse venner der laver store, enorme Hollywood film siger at grunden til at deres film er så succesfulde er på grund af de brand-partnere de har. Og så siger mine venner der laver små, uafhængige film "Jamen, hvordan skal vi kunne konkurrere med disse store, enorme Hollywood film?" Og filmen hedder "The Greatest Movie Ever Sold." Så hvordan vil vi specifikt se Ban i filmen? Hver gang jeg gør klar til at gå, hver gang jeg åbner mit medicinskab, vil man se Ban deoderant. Mens hver gang jeg laver et interview med nogen, kan jeg sige, "Er du frisk nok til dette interview? Er du klar? Du ser lidt nervøs ud. Jeg vil hjælpe dig med at slappe af. Så måske skulle du bruge noget inden interviewet." Så vi tilbyder en af disse fantastiske dufte. Hvadenten det er "Floral Fusion" eller "Paradise Winds," vil de få deres chance. Vi vil have dem gearet til både mandlige eller kvindelige -- solide, roll-on eller stick, hvad det end må være. Det er den billige tour. Så nu kan jeg besvare alle jeres spørgsmål og give jer den dyre tour.
(Video) MS: I have friends who make great big, giant Hollywood films, and I have friends who make little independent films like I make. And the friends of mine who make big, giant Hollywood movies say the reason their films are so successful is because of the brand partners that they have. And then my friends who make small independent films say, "Well, how are we supposed to compete with these big, giant Hollywood movies?" And the movie is called "The Greatest Movie Ever Sold." So how specifically will we see Ban in the film? Any time I'm ready to go, any time I open up my medicine cabinet, you will see Ban deodorant. While anytime I do an interview with someone, I can say, "Are you fresh enough for this interview? Are you ready? You look a little nervous. I want to help you calm down. So maybe you should put some one before the interview." So we'll offer one of these fabulous scents. Whether it's a "Floral Fusion" or a "Paradise Winds," they'll have their chance. We will have them geared for both male or female -- solid, roll-on or stick, whatever it may be. That's the two-cent tour. So now I can answer any of your questions and give you the five-cent tour.
Karen Frank: Vi har et mindre brand. Meget ligesom det du talte om at være en mindre film, vi er meget et udfordrende brand. Så vi har ikke den slags budget som andre brands har. Så det at gøre ting som dette -- du ved, at minde folk om Ban -- det er sådan noget vi er interesserede i.
Karen Frank: We are a smaller brand. Much like you talked about being a smaller movie, we're very much a challenger brand. So we don't have the budgets that other brands have. So doing things like this -- you know, remind people about Ban -- is kind of why were interested in it.
MS: Hvad er de ord som du ville bruge til at beskrive Ban med? Ban er blankt.
MS: What are the words that you would use to describe Ban? Ban is blank.
KF: Det er et godt spørgsmål.
KF: That's a great question.
(Latter)
(Laughter)
Kvinde: Overlegen teknologi.
Woman: Superior technology.
MS: Teknologi er ikke måden man ville beskrive noget som nogen putter i deres armhule.
MS: Technology's not the way you want to describe something somebody's putting in their armpit.
Mand: Vi snakker om modig, frisk. Jeg tænker "frisk" er et stort ord som virkelig spinner kategorien til noget positivt, kontra "bekæmper lugt og vådhed." Det holder een frisk. Hvordan holder vi dig frisk i længere tid -- bedre friskhed, mere friskhed, tre gange mere frisk. Den slags ting er mere den slags positive fordel.
Man: We talk about bold, fresh. I think "fresh" is a great word that really spins this category into the positive, versus "fights odor and wetness." It keeps you fresh. How do we keep you fresher longer -- better freshness, more freshness, three times fresher. Things like that that are more of that positive benefit.
MS: Og det er en multimillion dollar virksomhed. Hvad med mig? Hvad med en almindelig fyr? Jeg har brug for at snakke med den almindelige mand på gaden, de mennesker der er ligesom mig, de almindelige mennesker. De skal fortælle mig om mit brand.
MS: And that's a multi-million dollar corporation. What about me? What about a regular guy? I need to go talk to the man on the street, the people who are like me, the regular Joes. They need to tell me about my brand.
(Video) MS: Hvordan ville I beskrive jeres brand?
(Video) MS: How would you guys describe your brand?
Mand: Um, mit brand? Det ved jeg ikke. Jeg kan godt lide rigtig pænt tøj.
Man: Um, my brand? I don't know. I like really nice clothes.
Kvinde: 80'er revival, kontra skaterpunk, medmindre det er vaskedag.
Woman: 80's revival meets skater-punk, unless it's laundry day.
MS: Okay, hvad er brandet Gerry?
MS: All right, what is brand Gerry?
Gerry: Unikt. (MS: Unikt.)
Gerry: Unique. (MS: Unique.)
Mand: Jeg tror den genre, stil, jeg er ville være mørk glamour. Jeg kan godt lide mange sorte farver, mange grå og den slags. Men jeg har for det meste noget tilbehør, som solbriller, eller jeg kan lide krystaller og den slags.
Man: I guess what kind of genre, style I am would be like dark glamor. I like a lot of black colors, a lot of grays and stuff like that. But usually I have an accessory, like sunglasses, or I like crystal and things like that too.
Kvinde: Hvis Dan var et brand, kunne han være en klassisk Mercedes Benz cabriolet.
Woman: If Dan were a brand, he might be a classic convertible Mercedes Benz.
Mand 2: Brandet som jeg er jeg ville kalde det casual.
Man 2: The brand that I am is, I would call it casual fly.
Kvinde 2: Delvis hippie, delvis yogi, delvis Brooklyn pige -- jeg ved det ikke.
Woman 2: Part hippie, part yogi, part Brooklyn girl -- I don't know.
Mand 3: Jeg er kældyrs fyren. Jeg sælger legetøj til kæledyr i hele landet, i hele verden. Så jeg tror det er mit brand. I min sære lille industri, er det mit brand.
Man 3: I'm the pet guy. I sell pet toys all over the country, all over the world. So I guess that's my brand. In my warped little industry, that's my brand.
Mand 4: Mit brand er FedEx fordi jeg leverer varerne.
Man 4: My brand is FedEx because I deliver the goods.
Mand 5: Mislykket forfatter-alkoholiker brand. Er det noget?
Man 5: Failed writer-alcoholic brand. Is that something?
Advokat: Jeg er et advokat brand.
Lawyer: I'm a lawyer brand.
Tom: Jeg er Tom.
Tom: I'm Tom.
MS: Jamen vi kan ikke alle være brand Tom, men jeg finder ofte mig selv ved skæringen mellem mørk glamour og causal.
MS: Well we can't all be brand Tom, but I do often find myself at the intersection of dark glamor and casual fly.
(Latter)
(Laughter)
Og det jeg blev klar over var, at jeg havde brug for en ekspert. Jeg havde brug for een, der kunne komme ind i hovedet på mig, en der virkelig kunne hjælpe mig med at forstå det man kalder ens "brand personlighed." Så jeg fandt en virksomhed der hedder Olson Zaltman i Pittsburg. De har hjulpet virksomheder som Nestle, Febreze, Hallmark til at opdage den brand personlighed. Hvis de kunne gøre det for dem, ville de helt sikkert kunne gøre det for mig.
And what I realized is I needed an expert. I needed somebody who could get inside my head, somebody who could really help me understand what they call your "brand personality." And so I found a company called Olson Zaltman in Pittsburg. They've helped companies like Nestle, Febreze, Hallmark discover that brand personality. If they could do it for them, surely they could do it for me.
(Video) Abigail: Du medbragte dine billeder, ikke?
(Video) Abigail: You brought your pictures, right?
MS: Det gjorde jeg. Det allerførste billede er et billede af min familie.
MS: I did. The very first picture is a picture of my family.
A: Så fortæl mig en lille smule om hvordan det forbinder dine tanker og dine følelser med den du er.
A: So tell me a little bit how it relates to your thoughts and feelings about who you are.
MS: Dette er de mennesker der former måden jeg ser på verden på.
MS: These are the people who shape the way I look at the world.
A: Fortæl mig om denne verden.
A: Tell me about this world.
MS: Denne verden? Jeg tror ens verden er den verden man lever i -- ligesom de mennesker omkring en, ens venner, ens familie, måden hvorpå man lever sit liv, jobbet man har. Alle disse ting stammer og starter et sted, og for mig stammede og startede de hos min familie i West Virginia.
MS: This world? I think your world is the world that you live in -- like people who are around you, your friends, your family, the way you live your life, the job you do. All those things stemmed and started from one place, and for me they stemmed and started with my family in West Virginia.
A: Hvad er det næste du gerne vil tale om?
A: What's the next one you want to talk about?
MS: Det næste: Dette var den bedste dag nogensinde.
MS: The next one: This was the best day ever.
A: Hvordan relaterer det sig til dine tanker og følelser om hvem du er?
A: How does this relate to your thoughts and feelings about who you are?
MS: Det er som, hvem vil jeg gerne være? Jeg kan godt lide ting der er anderledes. Jeg kan godt lide ting der er mærkelige. Jeg kan lide mærkelige ting.
MS: It's like, who do I want to be? I like things that are different. I like things that are weird. I like weird things.
A: Fortæl mig om "hvorfor" fasen -- hvad gør det for os? Hvad er macheten? Hvilket pupa stadie er du i nu? Hvorfor er det vigtigt at genstarte? Hvad repræsenterer det røde? Fortæl mig lidt om den del. ... En lille smule mere om dig, der ikke handler om hvem du er. Hvad er nogle andre forvandlinger, som du har oplevet? ... Det behøver ikke at være frygt. Hvilken slags rutsjebane er du i?
A: Tell me about the "why" phase -- what does that do for us? What is the machete? What pupa stage are you in now? Why is it important to reboot? What does the red represent? Tell me a little bit about that part. ... A little more about you that is not who you are. What are some other metamorphoses that you've had? ... Doesn't have to be fear. What kind of roller coaster are you on?
MS: EEEEEE! (A: Tak.) Nej, tak.
MS: EEEEEE! (A: Thank you.) No, thank you.
A: Tak for din tålmodighed. (MS: Godt arbejde.)
A: Thanks for you patience. (MS: Great job.)
A: Ja. (MS: Mange tak.) Okay.
A: Yeah. (MS: Thanks a lot.) All right.
MS: Ja, jeg ved ikke hvad det her ender med. Der skete en hel masse mærkelige ting derinde.
MS: Yeah, I don't know what's going to come of this. There was a whole lot of crazy going on in there.
Lindsay Zaltman: De første ting vi så, var denne ide om, at man havde to forskellige, men supplerende sider til ens brand personlighed -- Morgan Spurlock brandet er en opmærksomt/spøgefuldt brand. De er stillet meget godt sammen. Og jeg tror, der næsten er et paradoks med dem. Og jeg tror nogle virksomheder bare vil fokusere på en eller anden af deres styrker i stedet for at fokusere på begge. De fleste virksomheder har den tendens -- og det er den menneskelige natur -- for at undgå ting, som de ikke er sikre på, undgå frygt, de elementer, og man tager dem virkelig til sig, og man vender dem faktisk til positive ting for en selv, og det er en fin ting at se. Hvilke andre brands gør det? Den første her er klassikeren, Apple. Og man kan også se Target, Wii, Mini fra Mini Cooper, og JetBlue her. Nu er der spøgefulde og opmærksomme brands, de ting er kommet og gået, men et spøgefuldt, opmærksomt brand er en temmelig kraftfuld ting.
Lindsay Zaltman: The first thing we saw was this idea that you had two distinct, but complementary sides to your brand personality -- the Morgan Spurlock brand is a mindful/play brand. Those are juxtaposed very nicely together. And I think there's almost a paradox with those. And I think some companies will just focus on one of their strengths or the other instead of focusing on both. Most companies tend to -- and it's human nature -- to avoid things that they're not sure of, avoid fear, those elements, and you really embrace those, and you actually turn them into positives for you, and it's a neat thing to see. What other brands are like that? The first on here is the classic, Apple. And you can see here too, Target, Wii, Mini from the Mini Coopers, and JetBlue. Now there's playful brands and mindful brands, those things that have come and gone, but a playful, mindful brand is a pretty powerful thing.
MS: Et spøgefuldt, opmærksomt brand. Hvad er ens brand? Hvis nogen bad een om at beskrive ens brand identitet, ens brand personlighed, hvad vil man være? Har man et op karaktertræk? Er man noget, der får blodet til at strømme? Eller er man et mere negativt karaktertræk? Er man noget, der er lidt mere rolig, reserveret, konservativt? Positive karaktertræk er ting, der kan lide at være spøgefulde, være friske ligesom the Fresh Prince, nulevende, eventyrlystne, med kant, eller dristig ligesom Errol Flynn, smidig eller adræt, verdslig, dominerende, magisk eller mystisk ligesom Gandalf. Eller er man mere som et mere negativt karaktertræk? Er man opmærksom, sofistikeret som 007? Er du etableret, traditionel, omsorgsgivende, beskyttende, empatisk ligesom Oprah? Er du pålidelig, stabil, hjemmevant, sikker, forsvarlig, hellig, eftertænksom eller vis ligesom Dalai Lama eller Yoda?
MS: A playful, mindful brand. What is your brand? If somebody asked you to describe your brand identity, your brand personality, what would you be? Are you an up attribute? Are you something that gets the blood flowing? Or are you more of a down attribute? Are you something that's a little more calm, reserved, conservative? Up attributes are things like being playful, being fresh like the Fresh Prince, contemporary, adventurous, edgy or daring like Errol Flynn, nimble or agile, profane, domineering, magical or mystical like Gandalf. Or are you more of a down attribute? Are you mindful, sophisticated like 007? Are you established, traditional, nurturing, protective, empathetic like the Oprah? Are you reliable, stable, familiar, safe, secure, sacred, contemplative or wise like the Dalai Lama or Yoda?
I løbet af denne film, havde vi over 500 virksomheder der var alle forskellige slags virksomheder der sagde, "nej," de ville ikke have noget med dette projekt at gøre. De ville ikke have noget med denne film at gøre, hovedsageligt fordi de ikke ville have nogen kontrol, de ville ikke have nogen kontrol over det endelige produkt. Men vi fik 17 brand-partnere, der var ville til at frasige den kontrol, der ville samarbejde, med nogen der var så opmærksom og spøgefuld som jeg og som i sidste ende bemyndiggjorde os til at fortælle historier, som vi normalt ikke ville være i stand til at fortælle -- historier som en annoncør normalt aldrig ville se.
Over the course of this film, we had 500-plus companies who were up and down companies saying, "no," they didn't want any part of this project. They wanted nothing to do with this film, mainly because they would have no control, they would have no control over the final product. But we did get 17 brand partners who were willing to relinquish that control, who wanted to be in business with someone as mindful and as playful as myself and who ultimately empowered us to tell stories that normally we wouldn't be able to tell -- stories that an advertiser would normally never get behind.
De gjorde os i stand til at fortælle historien om neuromarketing, som vi kom ind i under fortællingen af historien af denne film om hvordan de nu bruger en MRI til at ramme begærcenteret i ens hjerne til både reklamer, såvel som film marketing. Vi tog til San Paulo, hvor de har bandlyst udendørs annoncering. I løbet af de sidste fem år har der i hele byen, ikke været nogen reklamesøjer, ingen posters, ingen fliers, ingenting. (Bifald) Og vi tog ud til skoledistrikter hvor virksomheder nu gør deres indtog til skoler der mangler penge, over hele USA. Det, der er utroligt for mig, er, at de projekter jeg har fået mest feedback ud af, eller har haft mest succes med, er dem hvor jeg har interageret med tingene direkte.
They enabled us to tell the story about neuromarketing, as we got into telling the story in this film about how now they're using MRI's to target the desire centers of your brain for both commercials as well as movie marketing. We went to San Paulo where they have banned outdoor advertising. In the entire city for the past five years, there's no billboards, there's no posters, there's no flyers, nothing. (Applause) And we went to school districts where now companies are making their way into cash-strapped schools all across America. What's incredible for me is the projects that I've gotten the most feedback out of, or I've had the most success in, are ones where I've interacted with things directly.
Og det er hvad disse brands gjorde. De skar mellemmanden ud, de skar bureauerne ud og sagde, "Måske har disse bureauer ikke mine bedste interesser for øje. Jeg vil handle direkte med artisten. Jeg vil handle direkte med ham til at skabe noget anderledes, noget der vil få folk til at tænke, noget der vil udfordre måden vi ser verden på."
And that's what these brands did. They cut out the middleman, they cut out their agencies and said, "Maybe these agencies don't have my best interest in mind. I'm going to deal directly with the artist. I'm going to work with him to create something different, something that's going to get people thinking, that's going to challenge the way we look at the world."
Og hvordan er det gået for dem? Har det været en succes? Jamen, siden filmen havde premiere ved Sundance Film Festival, så lad os se på det. Ifølge Burrelles, havde filmen premiere i januar, og siden da -- og dette er ikke engang det hele -- har vi 900 millioner gange fået medie omtale for denne film. Det dækker bogstavelig talt kun lige en periode på to og en halv uge. Det er kun online -- ikke trykskrift, ikke TV. Denne film er ikke engang blevet distribueret endnu. Den er ikke engang online. Det er ikke engang streaming. Den er ikke engang bragt ud i udlandet endnu. Så alt i alt, er denne film allerede begyndt at få en masse momentum. Og det er ikke dårligt for et projekt, hvor næsten alle de reklamebureauer vi snakkede med adviserede deres klienter til ikke at tage del.
And how has that been for them? Has it been successful? Well, since the film premiered at the Sundance Film Festival, let's take a look. According to Burrelles, the movie premiered in January, and since then -- and this isn't even the whole thing -- we've had 900 million media impressions for this film. That's literally covering just like a two and a half-week period. That's only online -- no print, no TV. The film hasn't even been distributed yet. It's not even online. It's not even streaming. It's not even been out into other foreign countries yet. So ultimately, this film has already started to gain a lot of momentum. And not bad for a project that almost every ad agency we talked to advised their clients not to take part.
Det jeg altid troede på var, at hvis man tager chancer, hvis man løber en risiko, vil der i de ricisi opstå en mulighed. Jeg tror på, at når man skubber mennesker væk fra det, skubber man dem mere mod fiasko. Jeg tror på, at når man træner sine ansatte til at være uvillige til at løbe risici, så gør man hele sin virksomhed klar til at belønnings udfordret. Jeg føler, at det der skal ske for at komme videre, er at vi skal opmuntre mennesker til at tage chancer. Vi skal opmuntre mennesker til ikke at være bange for muligheder, der måske gør dem bange. I sidste ende, for at komme videre, tror jeg vi skal tage frygt til os. Vi skal sætte den bjørn i et bur. (Latter) Vi skal tage frygt til os. Vi skal tage risici til os. Vi skal tage risici til os, en stor skefuld ad gangen.
What I always believe is that if you take chances, if you take risks, that in those risks will come opportunity. I believe that when you push people away from that, you're pushing them more towards failure. I believe that when you train your employees to be risk averse, then you're preparing your whole company to be reward challenged. I feel like that what has to happen moving forward is we need to encourage people to take risks. We need to encourage people to not be afraid of opportunities that may scare them. Ultimately, moving forward, I think we have to embrace fear. We've got to put that bear in a cage. (Laughter) Embrace fear. Embrace risk. One big spoonful at a time, we have to embrace risk.
Og i sidste ende, skal vi tage gennemskuelighed til os. I dag, mere end nogensinde, en lille smule ærlighed vil hjælpe meget. Og når det er sagt, gennem ærlighed og gennemsigtighed, er hele mit foredrag, "Tag gennemskueligheden til dig," blevet bragt til jer, af mine gode venner hos EMC, der for $7.100 på eBay købte retten til at blive blive nævnt. (Bifald) EMC: Vender store data til store muligheder for virksomheder i hele verden. EMS præsenterer: "Tag gennemskueligheden til dig."
And ultimately, we have to embrace transparency. Today, more than ever, a little honesty is going to go a long way. And that being said, through honesty and transparency, my entire talk, "Embrace Transparency," has been brought to you by my good friends at EMC, who for $7,100 bought the naming rights on eBay. (Applause) EMC: Turning big data into big opportunity for organizations all over the world. EMC presents: "Embrace Transparency."
Mange tak gutter.
Thank you very much, guys.
(Bifald)
(Applause)
June Cohen: Så, Morgan, i gennemskuelighedens navn, hvad skete der præcist med de $7.100? MS: Det er et fantastisk spørgsmål. Jeg har en check i min lomme, der er udstedt til den overordnede organisation for TED, Sapling Foundation -- en check på $7.100 der skal bruges på min deltagelse til næste års TED.
June Cohen: So, Morgan, in the name of transparency, what exactly happened to that $7,100? MS: That is a fantastic question. I have in my pocket a check made out to the parent organization to the TED organization, the Sapling Foundation -- a check for $7,100 to be applied toward my attendance for next year's TED.
(Latter)
(Laughter)
(Bifald)
(Applause)