Time for some answers and to reflect. And a video, of course.

My lovely reader(s) and friend(s) (one and the same?) have been asking me questions related to my near obsession with virality and effective visual communications.

Question number 1: is there a magic way to ensure that a video goes viral? No, there is not. You can try to follow some basic rules that might increase the chances, but 'virality' is never guaranteed. I am pretty sure that if you look at the top 20 most viral videos of all times, only few were made with the calculated intention of becoming 'viral'; they just did. There is however a way to make sure your video is good and effective which brings us to..

Question number 2: does having a lot of money increase the probability of success? Not really. It helps in the production and hence increases the chance that the video will be well-executed. But success is another thing.

Question number 3: is it all about emotions? Do I need to make people laugh or cry? Emotions play a big part in the success of a video. You are much more likely to share something that has hit you in some way. Whether you couldn't stop laughing, or started crying like a baby.

Let me be very clear. There are videos made with no specific objective in mind. For example, you filmed something funny or sad by chance; you wanted to try something out; you have cute kids or pets and love filming them, and so on. These are the majority of videos that go viral. But when there is a specific objective, emotions will only work if the video has, how shall I put it, A POINT. I know it sounds almost tautological but believe me, it is not.

What I mean is that if you decide to produce a video, have some money, and someone willing to help you do it, the first question you need to ask yourself is: "What do I want to communicate with this video? Why am I doing it?". If the answer is not convincing - for you first and foremost - then, you can have plenty money and emotions, but your video will not be effective. Let me put it this way: a video can be nicely produced but if it's unclear why it has been produced than it's a waste of money and time for the viewer, never mind the producer. And, you know me, I always have a little example:



On YouTube, below this video it says: How many rights have you spotted in this video? Excuse me? Is this a way to get people to watch it again and increase the views? Way too complicated. There are no emotions, it's true, but it is quite well done. Who doesn't like a nice domino - although I have seen better ones - and the Brooke Shields look-alike, but sorry..what is the point? To explain to EU citizens they have rights, or to spend the remaining communications budget before the end of the year?

Question number 4: can a video be fun and effective without being superficial? This is the typical question of non-communications experts, now working in the communications department of a company or an institution, but engineers or some such by training. For these people, the problem with videos, but also with communications more broadly, is that it does not allow you to say enough, which means that you inevitably end up being superficial. While understandable, the question is flawed. A video needs to be clear. But simple and superficial are not the same. You cannot say everything you want, but you will be able to say what matters.

And here is my favourite - I swear I have been asked. Question number 5: how important are the images for a good video? If this question makes total sense to you, then you better stick to MS Word as your communications tool. How important? They are key. The images should speak for themselves and that is also why the video above does not work very well. The main reason why video can be so powerful is the amazing force of images and text, often with music, all working together. Images and Music = a slideshow. Music and text = a song. Text = a book.

As we are approaching Christmas, I owe it to you to mention also an uncomfortable, personal question. (Don't get your hopes up, nothing too exciting).

Question number 6: 'your blog is nearly two years old; you have watched countless videos and criticised just as many. But how many have you produced? Shouldn't you put your money where your mouth is?'  I have to confess that sometimes I do fear I might have lost the touch...

But does one lose touch for these things? I guess, that is maybe true for all that is practical, especially with technology changing so fast. I remember when the older producers and reporters were talking to me about shooting on film and not on video....I found it all quite tedious, but the relentless change of technology is slightly disconcerting. And hence I do understand now why they felt the need to point it out. So yes, technology changes and you need to adapt if you don't want to stay behind.

Insight and judgement on the other hand, no, you can ever lose. And on top of that, I believe most of have a gut feeling that makes us share and like what works, and ignore what doesn't. Of course all this is a personal thing. But so too is the huge bundle of human emotions that will make something powerful, beautiful, visual, funny or shocking. But still, perhaps I should put myself to the test....another one to add to the list of New Year resolutions?

I like ‘Debating Europe'. Have I become a softy? Not a chance.

Let it be said that I am doing my bit for the 'European Year of Citizens'.

I say this because, as I was complaining about the lack of clarity recently, today I want to show you something that instead couldn't be clearer: 'Debating Europe'.

Here is a cute video that explains what it is all about:




The idea is very simple. We want European citizens to be more connected with European decision makers (both at EU and national level) and vice versa? Then, let's give them the opportunity to interact directly with each other and start a proper debate on Europe. The website is incredibly well done, easy to understand and pleasant to look at. There are recognisable themes, lots of questions, and lots of answers. The 'infoboxes' are useful and look nice. The creators, the partners and the sponsors are all clearly listed. It is interesting to note that, even if it lists the European Parliament as a strategic partner, this is not an official EU initiative but the idea comes from one of the Brussels' think-tanks 'Friends of Europe'. Microsoft, Gallup and Skype are also strategic  partners. I would have liked to read what each of them actually does on this project, rather than a long spiel on how committed to Europe these companies are, but hey, you cannot have everything, right? Many pro-European and 'pro-debate-in-general' organisations are also mentioned as partners. You can be active in a variety of ways and follow it with every possible social media; it's refreshing to see that their Facebook page has more than 90 thousands likes.

These type of ideas and the careful - and I bet expensive - manner in which they are executed is a great possible way to bring citizens - at least the youngest generations- closer to Europe. I am not becoming a softy because we are approaching Schuman day, don't worry. I am only giving credit where credit is due.  So spread the word! (I want them to have 10.000 followers on Twitter before the summer!)

Reding, Arsenal and the Future of Europe

The other day I was talking to my husband over dinner and at some point I found myself saying: ' I think that one could say that Viviane Reding is a star!'. He nearly choked. He looked at me and said: 'There are no stars in the Commission, Virginia; it's the nature of their job....'

Let me try at least to explain why I said what I did, to myself as well actually... Viviane Reding a star? What had I been drinking?

I had just watched a 7 min video of the debate on the future of Europe, that had taken place in Dublin
in mid-January. The debate was meant to officially open the European Year of the Citizen.

Here is the video:

 

As you can see, after the Irish Taoiseach and Barroso had made some remarks and left (I assume so, as they disappear in the second part of the debate),  there comes Commissioner Reding... she is practically alone on stage - although at one point you see her with an MEP, in some sort of explosion of red, and with the Irish Minister for Europe. She moves back and forth as if she were a stand up comedian (not as funny though, but that is beside the point). The year of the Citizen is her 'baby' and she wants to make the most of it. She talks with emotion, recounting her personal experience as a Luxembourger being squeezed by two huge neighbours and as a woman fighting for gender equality. I mean, you are not blown away by her performance but at least there is a performance.

I am told she is loved by some (especially in the European Parliament) and hated by others who think she is an arch-federalist and mainly talks about popular - bordering populist - issues, to increase her own popularity and move onto greater things. But I say: so what? And could it be that she actually believes in what she is saying? And why is trying to be popular such a taboo in this city? I can hear it already: 'Oh dear, people actually understand and care about some of the issues we are dealing with....we must be doing something wrong!'

There is no easy answer though: as my dinner conversation progressed, some sort of dilemma emerged.

CASE A: If the EU decides to tackle so-called 'popular' issues such as gender quotas or bankers bonuses, often a wave of criticism by eurosceptics follows who think that Brussels should do less, not more and that these issues should be dealt with at national level.  They say, with some reason, that just because something is desirable (gender quotas), it doesn’t follow that this should be done at the EU level. 

CASE B (in full contradiction with case A, hence the dilemma!): In a situation such as the one we are in now, where the EU is as misunderstood as it is unpopular and where ignorance about Europe is fast turning into mistrust, dislike or even hatred, maybe it is not such a bad idea to deal with 'popular issue' – even if there is no compelling policy need to tackle the issue through the EU.

Just as a reminder, here are the three main meanings of the word 'popular':

1. regarded with great favour, approval, or affection especially by the general public

2. carried on by or for the people (or citizens) at large

3. representing or appealing to or adapted for the benefit of the people at large

Tackling issues that are not strictly on the European agenda might make people feel more passionate about Europe; hence, they should probably be part of what the EU does, if it cares about maintaining popular engagement and support. So, on top of the issues mentioned above, why not have, for example, a European equivalent of the Oscars - as European films are also funded by the EU-  with one prize for the best non-European movie? And how about....-pause for effect -  a true European football team? Not to substitute the national ones of course (then the EU would really be over!). Although, having said that....isn't Arsenal, just to take one, mostly composed of non English players? Think for a minute at the reaction if one said: 'Sorry Arsenal fans, but from now on your team will represent....Europe!' Just kidding. I am simply opening the debate, as Reding asked us to do, right?

In case you were interested in more details, not on the EU football team but on the Future of Europe debate here is a nice animated video (I do have some doubts about the timing of the whole initiative and about the voice in this video but still..):


So, as often happens, EU politicians might be damned if they do but also damned if they don't. Is it better to be criticised for being unpopular or to be criticised for being popular? Tough choice really. Maybe Theodore Roosevelt can help make that choice: 'It is hard to fail, but it is worse never to have tried to succeed'.

New Year's Resolutions!

According to a survey conducted by psychologist Richard Wiseman, eighty-eight per cent of all New Year's resolutions fail. So the following resolutions are bound to end in the same way....but you never know....we might be lucky!

So here goes, my three resolutions for a good 2013:

1) Focus on what really matters
2) Prioritise only what you can realistically achieve
3) Push to achieve more

Am I talking about me or the European Union? Not really relevant here.


What really matters (you see? I am already implementing resolution number 1!) is that if we want 2013 to be a year to remember we need to....have something to remember!

So:

1) We all know it will be another year of crisis and there will be many things worrying Europeans, So the EU should FOCUS on those from a communications point of view even if the working agenda is much broader than this.

A couple of examples? I have three that spring to mind: the euro and the debt crisis, unemployment especially among the young, and the lack of fairness (why is not everyone sharing the burden of this crisis?). There might be many more issues and themes but the key thing is to chose, then focus your actions even further and, above all, stick to your decisions. Hammer it into people's heads until they understand you are doing something that will benefit them.

2) There are also unachievable things the EU should probably stay clear off (again, I am talking in communication terms!) such as convince the UK people that it is actually in their interest to remain in the EU; better leave that hot potato to their politicians!

And then the EU should realise that some initiatives are no doubt well intended but in the end not really effective. An example? Well, 2013 is - as I am sure you all know, right? - the European Year of Citizens. I have been saying that there is a terrible disconnect between the EU and its citizens so in theory this should be a great initiative. The homepage of the website has a big banner that says: IT'S ABOUT EUROPE, IT'S ABOUT YOU! JOIN THE DEBATE! Agreed. The problem is: who is going to join the debate? Who is going to take part in the many consultations if not the ones that are already aware these consultations exist? Who will write to their MEP if not the ones that actually can name him or her already? And who is really going to check the Facebook pages of the EU institutions, (the irresistible page below notwithstanding!!) if not the ones that have already done it before - either to insult or to praise!  Believe me when I say that I really would like to be wrong on this one, but in my experience, there is little chance of this kind of initiative gathering a substantial number of new supporters to add to the existing ones. But please, please, do prove me wrong!


Want to join the Debate?

3) Finally, no matter what everyone, me included, will say, the EU must continue to push throughout 2013, for more Europe, for a better Europe, but also for a more understandable Europe and an in-touch-with-its- people-Europe because frankly if the EU does not do this....nobody else, in the current climate, will.

Happy 2013!