Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday November 02 2018, @05:53PM   Printer-friendly
from the I-see-what-you-didn't-do-there dept.

Snapchat's PR firm sues influencer for not promoting Spectacles on Instagram

Influencer marketing could get a lot more accountable if Snapchat's PR firm wins this lawsuit. Snapchat hoped that social media stars promoting v2 of its Spectacles camera sunglasses on its biggest competitor could boost interest after it only sold 220,000 of v1 and had to take a $40 million write-off. Instead, Snap comes off looking a little desperate to make Spectacles seem cool.

Snap Inc. commissioned its public relations firm PR Consulting (real imaginative) to buy it an influencer marketing campaign on Instagram. The firm struck a deal with Grown-ish actor Luka Sabbat after he was seen cavorting with Kourtney Kardashian. Sabbat got paid $45,000 up front with the promise of another $15,000 to post himself donning Spectacles on Instagram.

He was contracted to make one Instagram feed post and three Stories posts with him wearing Specs, plus be photographed wearing them in public at Paris and Milan Fashion Weeks. He was supposed to add swipe-up-to-buy links to two of those Story posts, get all the posts pre-approved with PRC, and send it analytics metrics about their performance.

But Sabbat skipped out on two of the Stories, one of the swipe-ups, the photo shoots, the pre-approvals and the analytics. So as Variety's Gene Maddaus first reported, PRC is suing Sabbat to recoup the $45,000 it already paid plus another $45,000 in damages.

The lawsuit might give Spectacles more exposure than Mr. Sabbat would have.

Also at Business Insider, Engadget, and Entrepreneur.

Previously: Snapchat's Spectacles: A Bad Idea in Hindsight
Snapchat Takes a Second Shot at Wearable Camera "Spectacles"
Snap Gives Spectacles a Face Lift to Look More Like Traditional Sunglasses


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by tangomargarine on Friday November 02 2018, @08:34PM (5 children)

    by tangomargarine (667) on Friday November 02 2018, @08:34PM (#757061)

    Because marketing people calculated people are so stupid that 4 instagram posts showcasing their product can be worth $45k.
    Tell you a lot about advertising and its targets.

    Sometimes I think advertising is the only thing supporting the U.S. economy; if marketeers suddenly realized that the average Joe ignored ads, the entire country would collapse in a matter of weeks.

    --
    "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=1, Underrated=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by takyon on Friday November 02 2018, @09:28PM (1 child)

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Friday November 02 2018, @09:28PM (#757084) Journal

    I'm amazed that GOOG has managed to keep growing over time [ycharts.com], mostly on the back of advertising.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Unixnut on Friday November 02 2018, @09:50PM

      by Unixnut (5779) on Friday November 02 2018, @09:50PM (#757094)

      I thought it was primarily by cheap debt. buying up and integrating start ups with good ideas (i.e. growth by acquisition), and the rumours they are financially backed by intelligence agencies, precisely because they are so good at mass surveillance and data collection (and by my understanding, are not as restricted in their spying as a government agency would be in the US).

  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by anubi on Friday November 02 2018, @11:07PM (2 children)

    by anubi (2828) on Friday November 02 2018, @11:07PM (#757127) Journal

    I consider most of the ads so insulting, if not blatently full of trickytalk, that I have elevated blood pressure and anger after the ad experience. Most ads are not informative; they are a thinly-veiled pack of businesstalk crafted to deceive... and I feel quite on edge even hearing the eruptions of those masters of deceit hooting off spewing deception.

    TV advertisers in particular have mastered the art of taking sometimes several minutes of excrucially slow passing air time to blather about how bad people look while all so carefully avoiding anything that holds them to anything. Its like they are just planting bear traps.

    --
    "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
    • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Saturday November 03 2018, @08:22AM (1 child)

      by maxwell demon (1608) on Saturday November 03 2018, @08:22AM (#757217) Journal

      Most ads are not informative

      You mean, there are informative ads?

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
      • (Score: 1) by anubi on Saturday November 03 2018, @11:03PM

        by anubi (2828) on Saturday November 03 2018, @11:03PM (#757427) Journal

        Once or twice per blue moon, someone will actually air an informative ad for something actually innovative and useful.

        Its like finding a diamond in a bin full of broken glass.

        I find the tell of a scam ad is the presence of trickytalk. If you hear trickytalk, they have already revealed their intent, you can safely mute them without fear you miss anything of value.

        --
        "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]