Not quite from the plains but a very distant view of the snow capped mountains

The Note

From the shadows in the depths to the sunny heights. The shade of gracious friends, the trees to the visiting birds. We fly, ride and flow through surprising water streams. Vantage points to rest, recollect and look back before trudging ahead . And all along we take moments off to look up and stare, and there lies the sun kissed peak of gold towering above. The place we are headed.. For our speck of gold dust.

The call of the mountain is the call of life.

And we just walk and hope the sun doesn’t set on us.

But who I don’t understand are folks who probably joined a year or two or at least 7-8 months after a company is formed and are still co-founders.

How?

One of the other reasons I hate designations, the other being the dislike to labels and being labeled in general. I respect positions.. when it is earned. I don’t think this fits into that category.

For all I know there might be a very valid logic to this sort of co-founding when the founding happens quite long after the company has been found. But my point is against glory hunters and faketrepreneurs. The posers.. not the artists.

Ishiguro’s Remains of the Day has a debate its lead character Stevens’ has with a fellow butler on notion of professionalism. What does it mean to be professional? And in those pages I found perhaps the most brilliant depiction of what drives successful men. The summary that I gathered while probably being subjective to a large extent is – reliability.

A butler for as long as he dons his uniform must bid the duty of a butler and not waver from what is expected of him. The idea was that a true professional doesn’t have different shades. That one can bank on a professional, at any time at any point.  We live in an interlinked world and going ahead our work will be a lot more collaborative (more on this later). There are others who depend on us to deliver so that they may in turn deliver on their bit. Professionalism counts, and counts a lot more in our time today.

What does this have to do with Culture?

Drag the idea of dependability to a company. Extend it to the larger gamut of reliability. A company needs to be reliable so that its stakeholders feel the larger sense of security that will enable them to focus on the aspects of work that needs their complete attention. Vendors need to know they can rely on this firm on work, credit and payments. Employees reflect and respond to the reliance they have on their firm. Clients need to know that things will be taken care of, that things are okay, that they’re in good hands. Reliability is the foundation of trust and trust in our times is brand equity.

It is in this regard that culture and professionalism find the sanctity of their relationship.

Time will come for any company who persevere  against it, when the original torch bearers hand over the blaze to the new leaders. It is an inevitable and necessary truth. And for the professional company the only way to remain as one is for it to have had the culture which would ensure that the new set of leaders who come in with visions and styles unique to them, do not fundamentally alter the circle of trust built by those before them. That the company still remains reliable to its partners.

And this is only possible through the gradual delivery of a defining culture.

For me culture isn’t the sham propagated by the spoofs of entrepreneurs, for many of whom the grand notion of being way too cool to care is culture. I don’t agree with that, in fact it sort gets me churning inside when I see pages on the sites of young firms with garnished flashy words on how they’re a young, vibrant, fun loving company under the epithet of culture. I don’t subscribe to it. And I think it’s one of the many misconceptions that has unfortunately gone mainstream.

Culture is attitude, it is not behaviour. Everyone knows this, but we all get it messed up.

It is what gets people to show up regardless of how bad or good the day is to do their bit every day. It is the rationale that the company has collectively built, that sets its trait and gives others the confidence to ally with it. It is the moral fiber and not the work condition.  Eating, drinking and creating till late night at work together and then sleeping over and then sleeping in the whole of next day to meet a deadline is an excellent story to be part of but it has nothing to do with culture (except maybe the very last bit). Culture is what gets everyone going through all the hours of their work from morning to dusk. Of course, it is important to note that a thriving culture is only possible with people who are professionals, that’s a perquisite and almost entirely non negotiable.

You become a professional when you care. Your culture defines what you care about.

It is a sense, it is a belief and it should percolate to the last bit of your team enough that they know what is priority for everyone else.  And then regardless of where the accountability ends up being, one is sure a consistent and therefore right decision will be made.  That’s reliability and it cuts across partners, team members and customers. Culture is what sets priorities are right.

Here’s a summary of the two conversations:

The argument continued till we reached a settlement of sorts which is not pertinent to the point of this post.

I am sure if you are of any relevant position in the business of digital media you might have had one of these at some point as well.

I constantly see tweets of this kind, it is an altogether different matter that these come from people who have probably no clue of how to make good quality videos and who’s only connection to anything viral is tweeting “This shit is viral”. But you know what I mean here. The point though is about me (excuse the immodesty ), and how I told Harsh that we can make viral videos and how I told the client that no one can make viral videos.  I must quickly admit that the conversations above are not verbatim and I have used my discretion to pen dialogues that didn’t happen exactly the way they did for cinematic effects.

Making a Point on Viral Videos: You Can Call Them Viral Videos

I run a video making business, and given that it is exclusively focused on videos for the web and mobile space, ‘viral videos’ are discussions that we frequently have both internally and among clients and partners. I don’t see any harm in the term ‘viral video’. I think it purely dictates a sentiment that we want to make a video that people can’t help but share. If you set about to make a video purely with this intention, why can’t you name it as a viral video? If it does eventually go viral just call it that – a viral. And not a viral video, it has then become a piece of content like any of the many img.ur and rage comics images that go viral on a relatively frequent basis.

But my point about calling viral videos viral videos is not just about the liberty to call them that. It is in fact about conceptualizing and strategizing video with a certain amount assurance that if we do 9 out of 10 things right in this video the likelihood of it going viral is close to 100%. I am completely certain of that. It is naive and wholly ignorant to a large extent to think that just making a kickass/cool video and praying it gets hits. It doesn’t work that way, on the contrary, one can make a viral video, whether it goes viral depends on how well the strategy is executed.

When you talk about Strategy of a Viral

There are two things to keep in mind

• It works at a conceptual level – your script needs to have hooks based on a keen understanding of the audience, which can either be gut instinct or data driven (both work equally well depending on whose gut it is and whose data it is)
• It is dependent a lot more on the execution level post production – it’s not just fancy editing but the first few hours after the video hits the web. How it come online, where all does it first show up and what are the associated activities to amplify it? These are pertinent questions that need to be strategised and planned well in advance. When done right, it can get you a viral.

Conceptualizing a Viral

There are 3 core component of a viral video concept. How much do people relate to it,  how does the video position that person who shares it and thirdly where or who do they find it from?

1. Getting people to relate to a video’s content is a tough ask, it requires not just intuitive and creative thinking but a strong dose of analytics. The question to ask is – are we saying what this particular person wants to say? People are implicit hinters online. If they are angry they put out some angry messages quoting nameless people, or sharing their angry music for instance. What people share defines them a lot more than how they’re able to define themselves. It is the core tenet of branding and social media. Kolaveri for instance stuck a chord with hapless lovers (that’s just one of the reasons of course) who have had soup days of their own.  Your video has to say things for people that they can’t say because if they do it might taint their image in some way. The content should be contextually relevant to people’s broadest network, it should not only make them go “hey this is me” but also, “fuck this is malkani” (malkani in this case is that friend in your circle that everyone knows and loves of course).  Your video’s script should get these hooks in place.
2. Everyone wants to be a finder, people like to be the person that other people turn to. I personally believe it is inherent to our quest for survival (it’s a mix of behavioural economics and philosophy, will keep it for some other day). So they’re constantly on the lookout for things newer and better than what others are sharing in their network. Therefore, the second step is to ensure that you’re not repeating what someone else has done, if you do you’re going to show your network seeder in a poor light. That is like the Sakinaka signal for viral videos. New, innovative presentation of sorts is the pertinent point here. This bit is tricky because a lot of content producers end up thinking this is what will make a video go viral, that just the presentation being so unique is enough reason for shit to go viral. I have faced such instances myself at CWS. The fact is it is not, it amplifies but it is not the crescendo itself. Presentation is like design while the core content still has to be strong. Think – how cool will the first person to find this video seem to everyone.
3. How is someone going to find the video perhaps is the most critical point. It makes or breaks a video in terms of reach. And this is where expertise and processes really comes into play. You need a broad audience with influential spheres within them that take it to other networks.

   Which website, blog, fanpage or twitter user is going to get first access? What time do we get it out? These are standard questions. However, things don’t end there. The web is built of systems and platforms and algorithms. They can be understood, they can be figured out in a way, to not be unethical, but still use them to optimize your reach. You need to think of how ratings, comments, taggings and keywords affect theYouTube ranking, how does YouTube select videos to put on the homepage and what can you do to get there.

A key ingredient is to build momentum, get things hot, make a lot of people watch the video at the same time. This is completely in your hands if you are efficient with your communications.

That is how a viral is made.

Why Did I Tell the Client Otherwise

There was conceptual issue and which was with the approach to the project. Viral isn’t a type of video, it is not a mould to fill in. Any video can be viral when you add value to the person viewing it – it can be entertaining, emotional, informative, anything. The important bit is to touch a nerve. In case of my conversation above, this basic ingredient of understanding was missing. It is not a regular agency blames client thing, in fact the said client is quite far from what the picture the above lines might paint, but there are a number of people of who carry a similar mentality, my effort was just to put a character in place for representation.

The crux of it is that when you create video content with the intention for people, your first focus should be consumer and then later the producer and production.

Alright, So What Viral Videos have You Made?

None. Came close a couple of times and there have been instances of highly engaging (8000+comments on FB feeds) videos but did it get people to share not quite. But from our first effort to the last one, we’ve been constantly bridging the gap, we’ve seen instances where it almost met the threshold but other factors gutted things.

It happens, but that said these views are coming straight from the field and not the fence.

There are of course many still left grappling the hooks of traditional media. And they will remain. The advent of social and the scope of digital wouldn’t change habits and existing reach. We’re not looking at a world that replaces print or television any time soon. However, their manifestation might be vastly different from how they are now. And this might happen far sooner than many anticipate.

And this change would be possible because of digital.

Digital media is now coming out of their electronic hard shells and moving about among us. Social Media made us the medium, the future in digital will make us more than just interactive as such a medium for a message. As agencies and digital professionals we can’t just remain managing useless copies on search results and fan pages and tweets. It needs to go beyond, the value would be more evident. That’s why we need a more-than-interaction role in the larger brand play whether our own or those of a client brand.

This more-than-interaction should/would be fueled by brands or any organization which wishes to engage and use the power of people for its survival. This activity that we are looking at is an experience, crafted by a not very complex yet not all too simple use of various elements that make a person a consumer and a medium at the same time. Digital helps craft this interaction as an experience. That is the future of this medium.

Experiences are cherished, memorized and spoken about. They mean a lot more than mere interaction or engagement. They involve a whole lot more and stay longer. Experience builds a bond a very visible one in how the person reacts to the brand thereafter. And as digital percolates into the mainstream through the devices that we carry and also around us, the experience is a lot different than just a feeling (the Internet of Things). The publishing part of digital media then becomes a storehouse (the new Facebook timeline for instance).

Like I said before these experiences need to be crafted, it requires craftsmen. Companies like mine will need to build an ecosystem that either brings craftsmen together while taking custody of the brand’s objectives or better still seeds and cultivates craftsmen. That is the future of the agency, knowing crafts and bringing their proponents together while their own individual craft lies in tying all this together and measuring and improving and learning. For the digital professional of this decade of which the first year just ended, you have two choices – either carry the vision or become a crux to implement it.

We are in the age of digital, the age of experience.

But then, it dawned, Steve wouldn’t have cared too much. It wasn’t his dream to be loved and accepted by all. It didn’t bother him. That he changed lives through his art isn’t his legacy really.

Nor are the game changing products that were born out of his singular vision that people will (or perhaps should remember him by). That was just an output, and that isn’t of much of value. For if that was the case his genius would have stopped with the iMac or the iPod. His vision was what made him unique and what made him Steve Jobs. And that can’t be left behind, it just remains for people to see, not take.

And a legacy left behind is worth nothing until it is taken.

And that legacy that he left behind is his outlook to work.

We, guys like me, we owe Steve, for instilling a belief of what work ought to be. To inspire us to make things better, perfect. To believe in the extra ordinary and the will to create it.

It doesn’t matter if I am not an Apple fan. If I don’t understand why people act like little children every October over the things they bring out. It won’t matter what they do ahead without his bespectacled vision. It won’t matter if his products changed the world or not. It needn’t. For what Steve has done is to show young kids, far beyond the realms of Cupertino, a way. He has shown us what to do with our time in this world.

The point however that stood out for me is the lack of control of what I’m going to post on my wall or ‘Timeline’ once I start enabling apps.

Facebook is taking a shot at immortality here. What it’s trying to be is this digital self updating diary of sorts of your life and thus become a default option you can’t not have. It wants to keep track of everything you do, even stuff that you wouldn’t share otherwise. Forget the access t such data and the options that it enables for marketers, that all comes later, here right now, it is between me and this website that is going to be my best friend yet my stalker. How you look at it or in fact how most of the 800 million people look at it will define if this was a make or break moment for Facebook. Cliche yes, but very true. This might probably be the best time to leave Facebook or get more active with it.

On one hand if you’re gonna hang around on FB anyway, it is imperative that you use it to its full potential, it’s just better that way, your Timeline will look cooler, the bouts of nostalgia a lot better and it all comes out with some cutting edge technology that you’ve got to admire.

On the other hand, there are people like me (for the time being), who don’t like sharing too many details of their lives. I don’t want people to know what I’m watching every time, or reading every time. There are aspects that I want to share and I don’t and it isn’t drawn on the lines of broad activities (and therefore apps), it’s marked at a far granular level. And this has got nothing to do with whether it annoys my friends or not, so the ticker doesn’t really solve the problem, or rather it is solving the wrong problem. Now the thing is, if I don’t want Facebook to do these, would mean I don’t use a lot of the apps that’s there around and that would be built in the times to come, and that sort of defeats the whole purpose of this new Facebook. Why would I stay then?

What FB is banking on is the fact that Ben Parr put rather succinctly, we all hate Facebook but we still remain because everyone else is still there. Facebook knows that well. And it knows you won’t rush out of it soon, and seeing others over share you might start sharing a lot more, and once it becomes this bank of stories from your life, it will remain eternal in 800 million social circles. It is going to make it imperative that you begin documenting your life, even stuff that you don’t want to otherwise. And at first look I am not liking it.

Web Hosting is going to get a lot of people rich and build a career they didn’t think existed like nearly a year back.

Online retail is going to build the next big names in consumer brands in this country in the coming decade.

Blogging is going to make a huge comeback as a point of influence and commerce in the larger media, advertising and PR landscape.

Mobile will not grow separately, the web and mobile will merge as media from a brand and consumer perspective..apps will become ubiquitous and platform/media independent. Invariably they will need either provide or power content. So the opportunity in the tablet and mobile world is two fold for the enablers and the creators.

Looking forward… [;)]