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.
我在過去的幾年裡 讓自己處在 非常困難的的情況裡 同時也有點危險。 我被關在監獄 - 困難。 我在煤礦場工作 - 危險。 我在戰區拍片 - 困難又危險。 我花了30天不吃其他東西,只吃這個 - 在開始時很好玩, 過程中有點困難,在結束時非常危險。 事實上,大部分我職業生涯裏, 我一直讓自己 沉浸在看似可怕的情況裡 為的是 研究社會問題 我用讓大家一同參與,使大家感興趣的方式, 希望讓這些研究 變得有娛樂性和能讓觀眾觸及。 所以,當我知道我要來這裡 做一場TED演講,探討世界上的品牌和贊助, 我知道我想要做一些不一樣的東西。
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.
你們有些人可能有也可能沒有聽過, 幾個星期前,我在Ebay貼出一則廣告。 我在Facebook發出了一些消息, 也在Twitter發出一些消息, 我讓大家有機會可以購買 我2011年TED演講名稱的命名權。 (笑聲) 沒錯,一些幸運的人,公司行號, 營利或非營利的機構, 會得到一次千載難逢的機會 - 因為我敢說,克里斯安德森(TED總監)將永遠不會讓這事再發生 - (笑聲) 大家可以來購買 你現在正在看的演講的命名權, 在拍賣當時,沒有主題,也沒有內容說明 更沒有提供任何 關於實際上題材的線索。 所以,買家得到的是: 你的名字會刊登在這裡: 你不知道我的TED演講的主題是什麼 且根據不同的內容,可能最後事情會完全搞砸, 尤其如果我做些讓你或你的公司看起來愚蠢的事。 儘管如此, 這是一個非常好的宣傳機會。 (笑聲) 你知道有多少人會觀看這些 TEDTalks? 很多人呢。 順便提一下,這名稱只是暫定的。 (笑聲) 因此,即使有警告過了, 我知道還是有人會買命名權。
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.
如果你一年前問我 我不會有把握能夠告訴你。 但我現在正在努力的新計劃,就是我的新電影, 我們將探討行銷,也就是廣告。 正如我剛才所說, 多年來,我讓自己處在一些非常可怕的情況, 但我再怎麽準備,再怎麽作心理建設, 也沒辦法來應付 以下這個危險的狀況 那就是:和這些傢伙(廣告公司)同在一間房裏。 (笑聲) 你看,我有拍這種電影的想法。
(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."
(影片)摩根‧斯珀洛克:我想做的就是拍部電影 是關於置入性行銷,產品行銷和廣告, 然後整齣電影的經費 就來自產品的置入性行銷,行銷和廣告。 所以,這部電影,會被稱為“最成功的電影販售”。 那麼,在“最成功的電影販售”講的是 一切從上到下,從開始到結束, 完全的品牌化 - 你會看到在電影中,看到冠名贊助商, 這是某某品牌。 現在這個品牌,高通球場(Qualcomm Stadium), 斯台普斯中心(Staples Center)... 這些人將永久和電影連結在一起 - 直到永遠。 整齣電影將探討這個想法 - (Michael Kassan:這是多餘的。) 你說什麼? (MK:我說這是多餘的。)你是說永久永遠嗎? 我是個多餘的人。 (MK:我只是這樣說。) 這只是爲了強調 說,“永久——直到永遠”。 不過,我們不僅擁有某某品牌冠名贊助商, 我們還將確保,我們把電影裡能賣的贊助部分都給賣出。 所以,也許贊助鞋的部分,讓它成為有史以來你穿過最好的鞋... “最成功的電影販售”中,有史以來你開過最好的車, “最成功的電影販售”,由有史以來你喝過最好喝的飲料所贊助,
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.)
Xavier Kochhar:這樣的想法是, 不止要展示說品牌是你生活的一部分, 而且還要由他們來資助電影嗎? (MS:讓他們出資來拍電影。)
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.
MS:實際上,我們會完整呈現這部分的工作。 我們的目標是要讓整齣電影的贊助透明化。 你在這部電影裡可以看到所有的過程。 這是整體概念, 整部影片,從開始到結束都是被贊助的。 我非常希望有CEG的贊助,使拍片能成功。
Robert Friedman: You know it's funny, because when I first hear it, it is the ultimate respect for an audience.
Robert Friedman:説來有趣, 因為當我第一次聽到這個主意時, 我覺得這是 對觀眾最極致的尊重
Guy: I don't know how receptive people are going to be to it, though.
Guy:我不知道 人們對這一切的接受度有多高。
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.)
XK:你有想過嗎 - 我不想用“角度”這個字,因為有負面的涵義 - 不過你知道電影要怎麼呈現嗎? (MS:我不知道。)
David Cohn: How much money does it take to do this?
David Cohn:這樣做要花多少錢呢?
MS: 1.5 million. (DC: Okay.)
MS:150萬美元。 (DC:好吧。)
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.
John Kamen:我覺得你跟贊助商見面時,下場可能會蠻淒慘的, 但我覺得這還是值得試試看 找些知名的大品牌。
XK: Who knows, maybe by the time your film comes out, we look like a bunch of blithering idiots.
XK:誰知道,也許你電影拍出來的時候, 我們看起來會像一群在胡扯的笨蛋。
MS: What do you think the response is going to be?
MS:你認為這樣會得到什麼反應?
Stuart Ruderfer: The responses mostly will be "no."
Stuart Ruderfer:大多數的反應應該會是“不要”。
MS: But is it a tough sell because of the film or a tough sell because of me?
MS:這是因為是電影本身所以找不到贊助嗎? 還是因為我的關係?
JK: Both.
JK:兩個都是。
MS: ... Meaning not so optimistic. So, sir, can you help me? I need help.
MS:...意思是不太樂觀。 所以,你能幫我嗎?我需要幫助。
MK: I can help you.
MK:我可以幫忙。
MS: Okay. (MK: Good.) Awesome.
MS:好的。 (MK:好。) 真棒。
MK: We've gotta figure out which brands.
MK:我們得弄清楚要哪些品牌。
MS: Yeah. (MK: That's the challenge.) When you look at the people you deal with ..
MS:是的。 (MK:這是個挑戰。) 當你看到和你交涉的人時 ..
MK: We've got some places we can go. (MS: Okay.) Turn the camera off.
MK:我們有一些門路。 (MS:好吧。) 把相機關掉。
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:我想他說“把相機關掉” 意味著我們不要有任何談話的記錄。 結果的真正意思是 “我們不希望與你拍的電影有任何關連。”
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.
MS:就這樣,一個接一個, 所有這裡的公司突然都消失了。 沒有公司想要在這部電影裡贊助商品 我很驚訝 他們完全不想參與這個計畫 我被打敗了,因為我覺得整個廣告的概念, 是讓你的產品能盡可能出現在越多的人面前, 盡可能讓更多的人看到 特別是在當今世界, 在新媒體和傳統媒體的交會下 還有不同的媒體區塊 我們不正是需要 用新穎時髦的傳播工具 才能將訊息轉達給群眾嗎? 不,那是我的想法。
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.
但問題是,你看, 我的想法有一個致命的缺陷, 那個缺陷是這個。 其實不是,這不是任何缺陷。 這本來是不會有問題的。 原本應該會很好的 但是這個圖正顯示出問題在哪裏 你瞧,當你在Google圖片上搜尋“透明度”, 這是 -- (笑聲) (掌聲) 這是第一張會出現的圖。 Sergey Brin(Google創辦人之一)我真愛你管理的方式。不 (笑聲) 這就是問題所在:透明度 - 不是虛偽或欺騙; 很容易發現或識破; 很容易理解; 特點是訊息的可見性和可得性, 特別是關於商業行為 - 最後一句可能是最大的問題。 想想,這些日子以來,我們聽到了很多關於透明度。 我們的政治人物,我們的總統都在說, 甚至我們的CEO也在說。 但是,當它突然變成現實的一部分, 事情就不一樣了。 但是為什麼呢?嗯,透明度是可怕的 - (吼) 像隻又怪又會叫的熊。 (笑聲) 透明度無法捉摸 - (音樂) (笑聲) 像一條奇怪的鄉間小路。 而且是很危險的。 (笑聲) 還有什麼也是危險的? 吃一整碗Cool Whip(一種冰奶油甜食)。 (笑聲) 這是非常危險的。
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.
當我開始和那些公司交涉 並告訴他們,我們想製作這樣的故事, 他們說:“不,我們要你製作出一個故事。 我們希望你製作故事, 我們希望你製作我們品牌的故事。“ 你看,當我還是個孩子 我父親會跟我說某些謊話 - 而且他臉部的表情會像平常那樣 - 他會說:“兒子,每一個故事都有三種面向。 有你的, 有我的, 還有真實的部分。“ 現在,這部電影,我們想說真實的故事。 但是,只有一個公司,一個機構願意幫助我 - 而且還是因為我認識John Bond和Richard Kirshenbaum很多年 - 我意識到,我必須自己來, 我不能再委託別人 我得自己和我的團隊直接到贊助商那裡去。 然後,你突然開始意識到 - 或者是我開始意識到 - 當你開始和這些公司交涉, 了解品牌的概念是大家共同的問題。
(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.
(影片)MS:我有位朋友是在製作大成本的好萊塢電影 我也有朋友和我一樣是小型的獨立製片。 我那位製作大成本好萊塢電影的朋友 說他們的電影之所以是如此成功 是因為他們有合作的贊助品牌。 然後我那些小型的獨立製片的朋友 說:“那我們要如何 去和這些大成本製作的好萊塢電影競爭?“ 而我們這部電影叫做 “最成功的電影販售”。 那要如何讓Ban這個牌子具體的在電影出現呢? 每當我準備好,每當我打開了我的醫藥箱, 你會看到Ban牌體香劑。 每當我訪問一個人, 我可以問,“你覺得現在體味清爽可以接受訪問嗎? 你準備好了嗎?你看起來有點緊張。 我想幫助你平靜下來。 也許你應該在受訪前試用一下。“ 因此,我們將提供其中一款絕妙的香味。 無論是“綜合花香”或“天堂之風” 都可以上鏡頭。 我們會讓他們準備好給男性或女性 - 不管是膏狀,滾珠的,或條狀的都可以。 這算是種小的宣傳手法。 所以現在我可以回答您的任何問題 然後討論更好的宣傳方式。
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.
Karen Frank:我們是一個小品牌。 就像你說作為一個小電影, 我們是來挑戰大厰的品牌。 我們不像其他品牌有龐大的預算。 所以做這樣的事情 - 你知道, 宣傳我們的牌子 - 這也是爲什麽我們有興趣的原因。
MS: What are the words that you would use to describe Ban? Ban is blank.
MS:那你會用什麼話來描述Ban這個牌子? Ban是空白的。
KF: That's a great question.
KF:這是個好問題。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
Woman: Superior technology.
女:高科技。
MS: Technology's not the way you want to describe something somebody's putting in their armpit.
MS:你不會想用科技來描述 大家會放在在他們的腋下的東西。
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.
男:我們的意思是自信,清爽。 我覺得“清爽”是一個很好的詞,和“對抗汗味和潮濕"比起來 讓人有正向的感覺。 它讓你保持清爽。 我們讓你常保清爽 - 較清爽, 清爽度更高,高出三倍。 這樣的話,應該有更正面的效益。
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.
MS:這是一間市值數百萬美元的公司。 那我呢?對一位普通人來說? 我需要去和在街上的人交談, 像我一樣的人,一般人。 他們需要告訴我他們的品牌形象。
(Video) MS: How would you guys describe your brand?
(影片)MS:你會如何描述你自己的品牌?
Man: Um, my brand? I don't know. I like really nice clothes.
男子:嗯,我的品牌? 我不知道。 我喜歡很漂亮的衣服。
Woman: 80's revival meets skater-punk, unless it's laundry day.
女子:80年代的復古 龐克風, 洗衣服那一天除外。
MS: All right, what is brand Gerry?
MS:好,蓋瑞牌是什麼?
Gerry: Unique. (MS: Unique.)
蓋瑞:唯一的。 (MS:唯一的。)
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.
男子:我在想我是什麼樣的風格 我想應該是黑色誘惑。 我很喜歡黑色, 類似灰色的東西。 通常我會戴配件, 像太陽眼鏡, 我喜歡水晶之類的東西。
Woman: If Dan were a brand, he might be a classic convertible Mercedes Benz.
女:如果丹是一個牌子, 他可能是一輛經典的敞篷車 奔馳(Mercedes Benz)吧。
Man 2: The brand that I am is, I would call it casual fly.
第二位男士:我的品牌 我可能會叫,休閒風吧。
Woman 2: Part hippie, part yogi, part Brooklyn girl -- I don't know.
第二位女子:有點嬉皮,有點瑜珈, 有點布魯克林的女孩 - 我不知道。
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.
第三位男子:我是愛寵物的人。 我在國內國外賣寵物玩具。 我想這是我的品牌。 我特異的小產業,這是我的品牌。
Man 4: My brand is FedEx because I deliver the goods.
第四位男子:我的品牌是聯邦快遞,我是快遞人員。
Man 5: Failed writer-alcoholic brand. Is that something?
第五位男子:失敗的酒鬼作家。 這樣可以嗎?
Lawyer: I'm a lawyer brand.
律師:我的是律師牌。
Tom: I'm Tom.
湯姆:我叫湯姆。
MS: Well we can't all be brand Tom, but I do often find myself at the intersection of dark glamor and casual fly.
MS:嗯,我們不可能都成為湯姆牌,但我經常發現 自己介於黑色誘惑和休閒風之間。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
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.
而我意識到我需要一位專家。 我需要有個人可以讀出我的想法, 有個人能真正幫我去理解 他們說的“品牌性格”。 於是,我在匹茲堡找到了一家叫做Olson Zaltman的公司。 他們幫過的公司,有雀巢,Febreze,Hallmark 他們不僅是發掘出品牌性格。 如果他們能幫這些公司,他們肯定也能幫我。
(Video) Abigail: You brought your pictures, right?
(影片)Abigail:你帶了你的照片,對吧?
MS: I did. The very first picture is a picture of my family.
MS:是的。第一張照片 是我的家人。
A: So tell me a little bit how it relates to your thoughts and feelings about who you are.
A:說說看你的家人對你的想法和情感有什麼影響或關聯。
MS: These are the people who shape the way I look at the world.
MS:他們教導我如何看待世界。
A: Tell me about this world.
A:告訴我你對這個世界的看法。
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.
MS:這個世界?我覺得世界是你的生活圈 - 身邊有朋友,家人, 你生活的方式,工作的方式。 所有的事情源於同一個地方, 對我來說都源於我在西維吉尼亞州的家人。
A: What's the next one you want to talk about?
A:接下來,你還想要說什麼?
MS: The next one: This was the best day ever.
MS:接下來:這是我最快樂的一天。
A: How does this relate to your thoughts and feelings about who you are?
A:請問這對你的想法和情感有什麼影響或關聯?
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.
MS:這像是我想變成誰。 我喜歡的是與眾不同的東西。 我喜歡的事情是怪異的。我喜歡奇怪的事情。
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?
A:告訴我“為什麼” - 那有甚麼關聯呢? 什麼是大砍刀?你現在算是人生什麼階段? 你覺得重新開始重要嗎?紅色對你來說代表什麼? 多告訴我相關的部分。 ...多一點你不認同的特質。 你曾有過的大改變是什麼? ...不要害怕。你坐過什麼樣的登山車呢?
MS: EEEEEE! (A: Thank you.) No, thank you.
MS:咿咿咿咿咿咿! (A:謝謝你。)不會,謝謝。
A: Thanks for you patience. (MS: Great job.)
A:感謝你花這麼多時間。 (MS:好極了。)
A: Yeah. (MS: Thanks a lot.) All right.
A:嗯。 (MS:非常感謝你。)沒什麼。
MS: Yeah, I don't know what's going to come of this. There was a whole lot of crazy going on in there.
MS:好,我不知道現在是怎麼回事。 在裡面有太多瘋狂的事了。
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.
Lindsay Zaltman:首先看到的是這個想法 你有兩種不同的品牌性格, 但兩者間是互補的 - Morgan Spurlock牌是一個謹慎/玩樂的品牌 這些都非常漂亮排列在一起。 不過我認為這當中有一個矛盾的地方。 而且我覺得有些公司 將只專注在一個自家的長處或其他的事物 而不是兩者都注重。 - 這是人性 - 大多數公司傾向於 迴避那些他們還不確定的事情, 避免恐懼,不確定的元素, 而你真的接受這些不確定性, 實際上,你把它們看得很正向,這的確很好 有哪些牌子像這樣呢? 第一個經典品牌,蘋果電腦。 也有別的牌子,Target,Wii遊戲機, Mini Coopers的Mini汽車,JetBlue航空。 現在有玩樂的品牌和謹慎的品牌, 那些東西,來來去去, 但一個玩樂的,又謹慎的品牌是非常強大的。
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?
MS:玩樂的,謹慎的品牌。你的品牌是什麼? 如果有人請你描述你的品牌識別,你的品牌性格, 你會怎樣說呢? 你的屬性是向上的?你會令人感到血脈賁張嗎? 或者,你的屬性是向下的? 你是冷靜,內向,保守多一點的呢? 上升的屬性是類似玩樂的東西, 新穎的像是新奇王子(Fresh Prince)一樣, 當代的,冒險的, 前衛或大膽的像埃勒爾‧弗林(Errol Flynn), 或敏捷靈活,世俗的,盛氣凌人, 奇幻的,或神秘的像甘道夫(電影魔戒巫師一腳)。 或者,你比較像是向下的屬性? 你謹慎,精明的如007探員? 你有名,傳統,有教養,保護型, 有同理心,像歐普拉(Oprah)? 你可靠,穩定,令人熟悉的, 安全,可靠,神聖, 沉穩,或明智 像達賴喇嘛或尤達大師?
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.
在這部影片的過程中, 我們有500多家公司 有向上屬性和向下屬性的公司 他們都表明“不願意”,不希望參與這個計畫的任何一部分。 他們希望與此電影無關,主要是因為他們無法掌控, 他們不能掌控的最終的結果。 但後來,我們確實得到17個品牌的合作贊助 他們願意放棄控制, 他們想要嘗試 和我一樣謹慎又玩樂的人合作, 最後,他們決定讓我們拍攝這部片 說出通常我們沒辦法說的事 - 也就是背後有廣告商贊助這件事。
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.
他們讓我們說明了一種關於神經行銷的故事, 我們在影片中說明這件事 他們是如何利用核磁共振成像掃描 去探測當你看到廣告 和電影宣傳時你大腦中慾望作用的區塊。 我們去了聖保羅,那邊已經禁止戶外廣告。 整個城市在過去的五年裡, 沒有廣告牌,沒有海報,沒有傳單,什麼都沒有。 (掌聲) 我們去學區 現在美國有很多學校都資金短缺 廣告公司就挾帶著大筆資金進入校園。 對我來說是難以置信的是,我得到最多回應的計畫, 或者我最成功的計劃, 都是我直接跟對方有互動的計劃
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."
而這正是這些品牌在做的 他們不委託中間人,也不委託廣告公司 或者說,這些廣告公司 無法替我作最大利益的考量。 我要直接和藝術家交涉。 我要和他一起工作,創造出不同的東西, 一些會讓人們去思考的東西, 那會改變我們看世界的方式。
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.
這對他們來說又如何?這樣是成功嗎? 那麼,既然電影在日舞影展首映,讓我們來看看。 Burrelles(媒體數據統計公司)表示電影在一月時首映, 從那時起 - 這還不是全部完整的數據 - 我們已經讓這部片有9億的閲讀率。 這只花了兩個半星期的時間。 只在網路宣傳 - 沒有平面文宣,沒有電視宣傳。 這部影片甚至還沒有上映。 它也不在線上播放。也沒有即時觀賞。 甚至沒有賣到其他國家呢。 所以,最後, 這部電影已經開始得到很高的氣勢。 結果是不錯的,因爲幾乎每間我們交涉過的廣告公司 都建議他們的客戶不要參與。
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.
我始終相信 如果你把握住機會,願意承擔風險, 那這些風險會變成機會。 我覺得如果你把人往風險小的一邊的話 你是把他們更推向失敗的那邊。 我相信,當你訓練你的員工要規避風險, 最後你是讓整間公司的 獲利得到挑戰。 我覺得,當往前邁進的時候 是我們需要鼓勵人們去冒險。 我們要鼓勵人們不要害怕 可能會讓他們怕的機會。 最終,向前邁進, 我們必須接受恐懼。 我們得把那隻熊關在籠子裡。 (笑聲) 擁抱恐懼。擁抱風險。 一次吃一大湯匙Cool Whip吧,我們必須接受的風險。
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."
最終,我們必須接受的透明度。 今天,比以往任何時候 多一點誠實可以讓你走更長的路。 雖然是這麽說,透過誠實和透明的過程, 我的整場演講,“擁抱透明度” 最後是由 我在EMC的好朋友, 付了7,100塊美金, 在Ebay購買了命名權。 (掌聲) EMC:為世界各地的機構 把大量的數據 轉變成大的機會。 EMC公司提出了“擁抱透明度。”
Thank you very much, guys.
非常感謝各位。
(Applause)
(掌聲)
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.
June Cohen:那麼,摩根, 以透明度為名, 這7,100塊美金到底用在哪裡呢? MS:這真是個奇妙的問題。 我在口袋裡有張支票 是要支付給TED的上級組織, 種子基金會(Sapling Foundation) - 一張7,100塊美金的支票 要用作我明年出席TED的費用。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
(Applause)
(掌聲)