The heavy-hand of LOCOG

What an extraordinary Olympics, for team GB, people GB and LOCOG.

The sponsors seem to have had their commercial deals fulfilled, although I wonder if BMW are peeved that Rolls Royce got inside the Olympic Stadium for last night’s closing ceremony, as chariots of bling.

The Olympic legacy will be mainly left to sporting, cultural and political bodies but I think GB’s heritage brands, of which there are many, will want to be taking into account the re-launch of brand GB, and what it means for them. Harking back to bygone days and rose-tinted nostalgia seems to have been superseded by modernity, quirky, fun and other characteristics the finest planners will be including in their brand’s sound-cloud.

After all this positivity it would seem churlish to even mention some of the heavy-handedness dished out by LOCOG. Unnecessarily harassing small businesses and grannies getting into the five-ringed spirit and an overly-complicated and under-subscribed poster site auction, are two examples.

What has got my Monday morning back-up it them censoring my social media?

I live in London Fields and have a really good view from high-up of the Olympic Stadium.

For the opening ceremony I tried to take some video of the fireworks. The quality using my mobile was so poor the only example I published was a short solarised video clip, on YouTube here.

Last night for the opening ceremony I dug out an old digital camera, mounted it on a tiny tripod and pointed it out the window. The results are no technical or artistic achievement, being a bit wobbly and out of focus. I’d been enjoying last night’s twitter-feed, adding so much to BBC’s TV coverage, so I posted the video on YouTube, tweeted and went to bed.

This morning a tweet tells me the video’s been removed by LOCOG.

Why? It was taken from my private space outside the Olympic facilities by myself and not ripped from a broadcaster.

I can only think LOCOG have some kind of quality control jobsworth who thought the poor quality would damage the Olympic brand. If that is the case they don’t understand the very nature of social media, sharing, good or bad.

Even Usain Bolt said there were too many people in the stadium telling you what to do. I really hope the legacy for brand GB isn’t tainted by people seen by many as petty, mean-spirited and/or stupid.

So put my video back-up now, at least ten people will want to watch it.

You can read my other blogs and about what I do here: www.balloo.co.uk

  • http://twitter.com/clungedotcom Mr. Clunge

    BMW owns Rolls Royce, so they knew EXACTLY what they were doing. Likewise the Mini Cooper in the opening ceremony….

  • Dunstan Bentley

    Lighting touchpaper here, but isn’t that a form of piracy. You are taking someone else’s content and then are broadcasting this to the world (and not your smaller audience of personal friends or followers on Facebook or Twitter per se)  It doesn’t matter where it is filmed (In the stadium, on your balcony etc) you are still broadcasting someone else’s content – and they have the right to ask it to be removed if spotted. Take the video by all means for your own personal memory jogger and/or share with friends, but don’t then moan that the rights holder has asked for it to be removed when you put it up on You Tube, which is a broadcast medium.
    I’m with LOCOG and indeed any other rights holder on this, unless of course you paid for the right to broadcast that content. Which I assume you didn’t…

  • Ivan Clark

    Thanks Mr.Clunge, I should have known that, Eeyore. I have mentioned in another blog
    http://www.balloo.co.uk/?p=1967 
    Dunstan, no touchpaper lighting, that is your view and LOCOG’s. As I don’t benefit commercially or disadvantage the official sponsors, I don’t see it that way. I also prefer to not white-label the headline. Thanks for your comments

  • Mark Barber

    My experience is that Confirmation Bias works in the opposite way with regard to media decision making.  For evidence, look at the strength of traditional broadcast media (radio & TV) in terms of share of consumer time (from IPA Touchpoints) then compare to their share of ad revenue. Now make the same comparison for online!
    I think this is because the people that make day-to-day channel decisions within media agencies and advertisers tend to be younger, urban, technophiles, whose job demands them to be knowledgeable about the latest media technology and how it relates to advertising. This focus on the new and shiny means that they are more instinctively predisposed towards online media over ‘traditional’ channels.
    In my view, the findings of IPA’s “Long and the Short of It” study is helpful in challenging confirmation bias in either direction and should be common knowledge amongst agency planners.

    • Axel Lariat

      Intelligent comment Mark, I agree wholeheartedly. Of course the internet has opened up a world of marketing opportunities that weren’t previously available to us. And it is very trackable / accountable, I believe this is why media agency people like to push it to clients. A good press or TV ad may not be electronically tagged but ignore their huge impact and emotional resonance at your peril.

  • Most discussed/rated

  • Tags

  • Authors

  • Archives

    August 2012
    M T W T F S S
    « Jul   Sep »
     12345
    6789101112
    13141516171819
    20212223242526
    2728293031