For those of us that market products in the modern world, we know that social media is a vital component for any marketing plan. But we also know the highs and lows that such platforms bring. This past week, I read a fascinating article titled Why Twitter’s Dying. While Twitter’s economics have been in the news as of late, the article spoke to a broader issue around social media platforms and the general abuse of its users. This article is really worth a read because everyone I talk to is thinking about the points this author raises.
But while social media can have its pitfalls, it also can bring substantive rewards. Last Sunday I sent a tweet about my favorite show Madam Secretary. The official Twitter account for the show retweeted mine resulted in over 6,000 impressions. Yes, pretty impressive for something that just took me about a minute to generate. But on the other side, when I was trying to locate a photo and went into the archive on Justice Is Mind’s Facebook page I found a horribly derogatory comment from an actor that auditioned for the film. Yes, I deleted it. Sadly, jealousy and bitterness is a large part of the abuse on these platforms. Social media, to quote Joan Crawford in Mommie Dearest, “It’s a sword. It cuts both ways.”
Certainly social media has assisted in marketing Justice Is Mind and my other projects, but the real driver is press. Anyone can post to social media (and even buy “likes”), but reporters are still the gatekeepers to their audiences, audiences built the old fashioned way by delivering content their customers want to read, customers that have either been acquired by a paid subscription, advertising or both. None of us in their right mind would pay for a social media platform, but we still pay for a subscription to a media outlet in one form or another. You are either going to shell out some money or sit through an ad. Content isn’t free.
But content is what this is all about isn’t it? If you don’t have interesting engaging content, nobody is going to care. Filmmaking is about developing content and we have seen a seismic shift in how it’s marketed and distributed. Just this week, Paramount Pictures announced a new release experiment of shortening the theatrical release window of the latest Paranormal Activity film before it goes to VOD. Will it work? Who knows because VOD numbers are a guarded secret in the industry.
While VOD is the primary gateway towards distribution for so many films, I strongly believe that a theatrical release of some sort is critical. Not only do reporters take a film more seriously if it’s “in theaters” but you are developing an audience along the way that can only help when you arrive on VOD. But like all things in this industry, you have new companies looking to exploit the promises of VOD distribution at the expense of the filmmaker. Yet again this week I received an email from a well-known distributor/aggregator claiming the benefits of working with them but paying upfront for distribution to platforms. Seriously upfront.
The film industry is just like the world of magazine and book publishing, companies promising the literal Moon without any skin in the game. As a well known writer said in her latest email newsletter about service companies in her industry, “They claim to make your journey easier, more profitable, give you access to people you’d never meet otherwise. What you don’t realize is that many of them are simply attempting to make a buck off your eagerness.”
This entry was posted on October 17, 2015 by markashtonlund. It was filed under General and was tagged with distributors, Facebook, film financing, film industry, filmmaking, In Mind We Trust, independent film, Justice is Mind, Madam Secretary, Mommie Dearest, Paramount Pictures, Paranormal Activity, social media, Supreme Court, theatrical release, Twitter, VOD.