Recommended research
Marketing Attribution: Valuing the Customer Journey
Econsultancy's Marketing Attribution: Understanding Value Across the Customer Journey, sponsored by Google Analytics, is a survey and collection of interviews with marketers about the benefits of attribution across multiple channels, various approaches and technologies used, and the keys to success.
md at open doors
24 March 2008 06:35am
useful article ...
http://www.webvideos.co.uk/directors/why_is_video_content_the_future_for_business_websites_1.html
MD at WebVideos
24 March 2008 11:20am
thanks maurice.
since i wrote that article i have new statistics that continue to prove much greater contact rates when a webvideo is shown.
None
26 March 2008 19:36pm
Why is video content the future for business websites?
In one short naswer to your question, the same reason TV is more popular than reading. People don't have to work at absorbing the information as long as it's presented in a digestible fashion.
Have you seen the craze in the US where small businesses like car lots are producing their own tv commercials and publishing them online, on sites like youtube?
We've found video content to be very effective, particularly in the viral sense for some fairly major blue chip clients, but the key is relevance, often humour (without degrading the brand) and decent production values.
It's become such a large part of our business that we've just purchased a production studio in London to focus on just doing website video content for companies and viral campaigns. I've used these guys a lot www.TheAgencyOnline.co.uk for the name and number of the production studio.
Freelance Web Consultant at architxt.net
27 March 2008 18:04pm
Why is video content the future for business websites?
Not for every business, but yes.
The challenge for small business, though, is to produce videos that are good enough to be noted on the YouTube and its clones. Quite a challenge on a limited budget.
Having said that, production values are not top priority where the eyeballs are. So creativity, above all, is the name of the game.
I would go as far as saying that any company who is serious about video should set up a YouTube channel. Perhaps even use it as their main video delivery platform keeping mpegs archived deep within their sites.
To conclude, I think it's important to complement video with relevant content and good IA practices. Videos alone often lack meaning (unless you actually watch them) . I don't think that Google, as yet, indexes the spoken word.
MD at WebVideos
28 March 2008 08:55am
It would seem that there is general agreement about this.
In response to Lawrence i tend to agree that any company serious about video should set up on YouTube. Production values are important in my opinion, though a video certainly doesn't have to be of a hollywood blockbuster quality.
What is more important is to know what you want the video to achieve. Most of our clients seem to think that a 3-5 minutes 'kitchen sink n all' video is what they want. As a general rule that is wrong. Marketing type videos should be single message and brief (60 seconds +/-). Customer Service videos can be longer and usually they will be.
Freelance Web Consultant at architxt.net
28 March 2008 09:23am
"Production values are important in my opinion, though a video certainly doesn't have to be of a hollywood blockbuster quality."
You're right here. Big brands can't get away with sloppy productions. Unless they are intentionally sloppy (and the user realises that).
Manager at Innagle
03 April 2008 19:08pm
Consider it carefully - the general rule is: "Let the customer decide". Therefore:
1. Do not start the video automatically
2. Do include a MUTE option
And of course, as mentioned, keep the run-time 30-60 secs max.
Regards,
Bjarne
Manager, Innagle - The free company directory for outsourcing and consultants
http://www.innagle.com
MD at WebVideos
05 April 2008 10:51am
I find i don't agree with this general rule. Whether the viewer gets a choice about watching the video or not will depend on each situation.
To use an analogy, if i was operating in a sunday market selling my wares then i might have to speak to people passing by get their attention. Nothing wrong in that and they would understand it.
I would agree with 30-60 seconds for a first video, but there are plenty of cases where longer and more detailed videos are justifiable and will be watched. For example, providing customer service.
anyway, good debate!
On 19:08:01 3 April 2008 Innagle wrote:
md at open doors
05 April 2008 12:57pm
I agree that the type of video content depends on the context and the objectives ie longer videos can be highly appropriate in customer services where they are proving to save considerable call centre costs - at the same time the consumer is king in the sense that if he/she wants to mute or stop the video he/she should be able to do so quickly and easily
useful discussion!
cheers
Maurice
Director at QM Consulting Ltd
07 April 2008 13:57pm
Let me add an interesting (if perhaps slightly provocativel) viewpoint to the question about choice about watching the video or not.
1) If an organisation is subject to UK laws then its website must be accessible or make reasonable adjustments to allow accessibility to comply with the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA)
2) Many accessibility experts believe that conforming to the W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) (whilst not a specific requirement for compliance with the DDA) will help any defence in court against discrimination.
3) There is a specific requirement in the W3C WCAG (checkpoint 7.3 priority level 2) that says "Until user agents allow users to freeze moving content, avoid movement in pages"
Of course this is all subject to interpretation and there is no case law (yet), but I think it is wise to proceed with caution. This obviously to any kind of animation as well as video.
On 10:51:14 5 April 2008 AndyAndy wrote: