The Rotten Apples|海报/平面,APP|广告营销案例【ADGuider广告指南】

腐烂的苹果

案例简介：概要 18至34岁的女性中有三分之一是工作场所性行为不端的受害者，其中大多数保持沉默。2017年，哈维·温斯坦的故事破裂了。这是一个分水岭，揭露了好莱坞数十年来的系统性性虐待。每天之后，越来越多的关于不同人虐待的故事都出来了。由此，我们的想法是创建一种工具，该工具将使道德媒体消费变得更加容易，并提高人们对电影和电视中普遍存在的性行为不端的认识。随着围绕该主题的意识和对话的增加，人们希望有一个包容性的未来和一个没有不平等和性骚扰的工作场所。战略我们没有针对特定的人群或组织，也没有宏伟的新闻计划。很简单。因为围绕这个问题的争议在所有媒体上都如此普遍，所以我们知道，如果我们的网站陷入困境，它就有可能爆炸。我们主动向《纽约时报》报道了一篇独家报道，该报道打破了温斯坦丑闻。然后，我们在自己的频道上分享了它。就像四位创作者自己的Facebook和Twitter提要一样，它从那里有机地发展起来。烂苹果是公关信息媒介的经典例子。数字工具本身足够强大，可以承载自己的水，我们所需要做的就是打开闸门，然后覆盖范围就会随之而来。这个名字本身，是烂番茄上的戏剧，是旨在立即引起轰动的公关举动，而且确实如此。相关性摘要的目的是提高人们对数字工具的认识，该工具突出了电影和电视中普遍存在的性行为不端。随着围绕这个主题的意识和对话的增加，人们希望有一个包容性的未来和一个没有不平等的工作场所。我们通过与《纽约时报》 (New York Times) 协商独家报道引发的简单的公共关系计划，启动并有机地传播了这一消息。这在100多家媒体上滚雪球般扩大了报道范围。这个词在几个小时内就传出了。结果由于没有花在媒体上的钱，该网站产生了大约57亿个印象 (6400万美元的媒体收入)，包括仅在网站上进行400万搜索。每个访客平均花费了惊人的14分10秒。流量在很大程度上要归功于几乎每个主要媒体的200 + 文章，包括《纽约时报》、《名利场》、《Buzzfeed》、《Slate》、《GQ》、《副》、《复杂》、《混搭》、《纽约客》等。该网站也是各种新闻节目的主题，例如CNN，HLN，Glenn Beck Show，CBS周日上午，CBC，NPR的The Frame，PBS等。此外，它引发了一场激烈的公众讨论，即我们是否可以通过72,000多个独特的社交互动将艺术与艺术家分开。“腐烂” 的分类绝不是要谴责一个项目-通常，性虐待和性骚扰的受害者在这些项目上工作，他们不应该受到进一步的影响-而是要通知观众并给他们一个新的镜头来观看一个项目。执行温斯坦丑闻在2017年10月5日爆出，由《纽约时报》牵头。时机很重要，因为在最初的故事破裂后，我们需要足够的时间来度过，以允许更多的人分享他们的 # MeToo故事。在《时代》杂志在12月8日上宣布 # MeToo运动的女性为 “年度人物” 之后，我们认为我们的数据库足够广泛，可以启动该网站。12月11日，烂苹果网站启动。一旦这个故事上线，并在该网站的四个创作者的个人社交渠道上分享后-他们已经4,617了Facebook朋友-闸门打开，导致GQ，名利场，Buzzfeed，Slate，华盛顿邮报，副，复杂，可混搭等出版物的200多个功能，《纽约客》和名单还在继续。运动描述名利场 (Vanity Fair) 将其描述为 “带有后温斯坦扭曲的烂番茄”。它是一个非常简单的数字工具，旨在让消费者知道他们感兴趣的电影或电视节目是否与被指控性行为不端的人有关。通过将信誉良好的第三方文章连接到类似于IMDB的开源数据库，用户只需输入电影或电视节目的名称，网站就会告诉他们一个项目是 “烂” 还是 “新鲜”。如果查询产生 “烂” 结果，它将列出与指控相关的人，并提供指向信誉良好的第三方文章的链接，用户可以单击以了解更多信息。由于系统已更新以实时反映所报告的内容，因此该站点还允许用户提供丢失的名称 (至少附加了一个可靠的来源) 或更正。

腐烂的苹果

案例简介：Synopsis A third of women between the ages of 18 to 34 have been victim to sexual misconduct in the workplace, with the majority of those remaining silent. In late 2017, the Harvey Weinstein story broke. This was a watershed moment that uncovered decades of systemic sexual abuse within Hollywood. Each day after, more and more stories of abuse by different people came out. From this, our idea was to create a tool that would make ethical media consumption easier as well as drive awareness of just how pervasive sexual misconduct is in film and television. With increased awareness and conversation surrounding the subject, the hope is for a future of inclusivity and a workplace free of inequality and sexual harassment. Strategy We didn’t target a specific demographic or organization, nor was there a grandiose plan for press. It was simple. Because the controversy surrounding the issue had been so pervasive across all media, we knew that if our site caught on even a little, it had the potential to blow up. We proactively pitched an exclusive story to The New York Times, which broke the Weinstein scandal. We then shared it on our own channels. As in, the four creators’ own Facebook and Twitter feeds and it grew organically from there. The Rotten Apples is a classic example of the medium being the PR message. The digital tool itself was strong enough to carry its own water, all we needed to do was open the floodgates and the coverage would follow. The name itself, a play on Rotten Tomatoes, was a PR move intended to create immediate buzz, and it did. Relevancy The goal of the brief was to generate awareness for a digital tool that highlights the pervasiveness of sexual misconduct in film and television. With increased awareness and conversation surrounding the subject, the hope is for a future of inclusivity and a workplace free of inequality. We launched and then spread the word about it organically, through a simple public relations plan triggered by negotiating an exclusive story with The New York Times. This snowballed into wider coverage with over 100 media outlets. The word was out within a matter of hours. Outcome With no money spent on media, the website generated roughly 5.7 billion impressions ($64 million in earned media) including 4 million searches on the site alone. Each visitor, on average, spent an astounding 14 minutes and 10 seconds. The traffic is in large part owed to the 200+ articles about it by virtually every major outlet including The New York Times, Vanity Fair, Buzzfeed, Slate, GQ, Vice, Complex, Mashable, The New Yorker and more. The site was also the subject of various news programming like CNN, HLN, The Glenn Beck Show, CBS Sunday Morning, CBC, NPR’s The Frame, PBS, etc. Furthermore, it’s sparked an intense public discussion over whether or not we can separate art from the artist with more than 72,000 unique social interactions. In no way is the “Rotten” classification meant to be a condemnation of a project–often, victims of sexual abuse and harassment worked on these these projects and they should not be further impacted–rather it is meant to inform viewers and give them a new lens with which to view a project. Execution The Weinstein scandal broke on October 5th, 2017, with The New York Times leading the story. Timing was important, as we needed enough time to pass after the initial story broke, to allow for more individuals to share their #MeToo stories. After Time Magazine proclaimed the women of the #MeToo movement as “Person of The Year” on December 8th–we felt that our database was extensive enough to launch the site. On December 11th, The Rotten Apples website launched. Once that story went live, and after sharing it on the personal social channels of the site’s four creators’–combined they have 4,617 Facebook friends–the floodgates opened leading to more than 200 features by publications such as GQ, Vanity Fair, Buzzfeed, Slate, Washington Post, Vice, Complex, Mashable, The New Yorker and the list goes on. CampaignDescription Vanity Fair described it as “a Rotten Tomatoes with a post-Weinstein twist.” What it is, is a very simple digital tool designed to let consumers know whether or not a film or television show they’re interested in is tied to someone with allegations of sexual misconduct. By connecting reputable third party articles to an open source database similar to IMDB, users simply type in the name of a film or television show and the site tells them whether a project is “Rotten” or “Fresh”. If the query yields a “Rotten” result, it lists out who the allegations are tied to and provides links to the reputable third party articles where users can click to learn more. Because the system is updated to reflect what’s being reported in real time, the site also allows for users to provide missing names–with at least one credible source attached–or corrections.