# data[].attributes.body
The article below is interesting as it shows us how Qantas communicated about the crowdsourcing project (ex: posters "Australians, we want your name on a plane").

In this example, crowdsourcing was used in a very strategic way. Consumers participated in a fun way to the advertising campaign. They didn't feel the need to be paid, they just freely gave their image to Qantas, to be seen on TV.

Qantas used crowdsourcing to add a multi-channel dimension to their campaign.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Qantas has launched a new brand positioning - "You're the reason we fly" - as the airline sets out on what marketing boss Lewis Pullen today described as "the most multi-channel, multi-dimensional campaigns ever launched in Australia".

Pullen, Qantas' executive manager of marketing briefed the airline board on the new brand direction last night and revealed it at a press conference this morning.

The new campaign for Qantas will see a Mojo-led project designed to tap into the mass personalisation marketing used by the likes of the Share A Coke campaign and the Bonds Birthday Project.

A Qantas A380 and a Boeing B737 will have the "Spirit of Australia" slogan changed to "Spirt of Australians". Consumers will be asked to upload their names in the hope of having them appear as one of hundreds emblazoned on the planes. They will also be invited to upload photos of themselves which may be used as part of a mosaic of faces in the end frame of the company's next TV ad.

A further element of personalisation will see those photos served in personalised online ads. This will be delivered to consumers as they surf major Australian sites including the news Limited, Fairfax and Google networks, thanks to a cookie dropped on their computers. The digital element of the campaign is being carried out by Amnesia Razorfish.

Customers who have the Qantas app open on their smartphones will also be served personalised ads when they pass a number of Adshel digital billboards.

The campaign is aimed at the domestic market. Droga5 was announced as the airline's global creative lead at the beginning of the month.

I Still Call Australia Home will still be used by Qantas, but mainly in connection with major national events, Pullen said.

Pullen did not disclose the budget of the campaign but said that a significant element would be on Qantas' own properties including inflight TV and its own website. He said: 'I would not say paid media is the last resort but we are very sensitive to the spend."

The campaign kicks off in the weekend press, with the invitation to the public to upload their names and pictures running until July 19. Pullen did not disclose details of the next three phases, although they are labelled "celebrate and Olympics", "Thank you" which will include a TV ad and "Prove"

Pullen said: "It's probably one of the most multi-channel, multi-dimensional campaigns ever launched in Australia."

Press ad for announcement phase:

Press ad for invitation phase:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Qantas: You're the reason we fly - Mumbrella

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Qantas has launched a new brand positioning - "You're the reason we fly" - as the airline sets out on what marketing boss Lewis Pullen today described as "the most multi-channel, multi-dimensional campaigns ever launched in Australia". Pullen, Qantas' executive manager of marketing briefed the airline board on the new brand direction last night and revealed it at a press conference this morning.

# data[].attributes.headline
The video of the campain "You're the reason we fly"

# data[].attributes.subject
The video of the campain "You're the reason we fly"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Qantas 'You're the reason we fly' 90 SEC TVC by Publicis Mojo - B&T

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Qantas 'You're the reason we fly' 90 SEC TVC by Publicis Mojo - B&T

# data[].attributes.body
Qantas used crowdsourcing for a multi-million dollar advertising campaign.

With this, Qantas managed to make a very good use of crowdsourcing, social media and new technologies (ex: iphone apps) to create a popular advertising campain.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
by David Flynn | June 29, 2012

Qantas is set to embark on a multi-million dollar advertising campaign built around the new tagline "You're the reason we fly".

The campaign will include the airline's biggest ever social media push, which will include emblazoning the names of thousands of Australians onto the side of a Qantas Airbus A380 and Boeing 737.

People can submit their name at the new Qantas.com/You website, and also upload a photo which can appear in online and TV advertisements.

"Over the next two weeks, we're asking Australians to upload their photo and name via qantas.com/you or by using a specially developed mobile phone or Facebook app" explains Qantas Executive Manager Marketing Lewis Pullen.

Put your name on a plane...

"We're hoping we can get around 1,600 names on the A380" Pullen told Australian Business Traveller.

"There are some analogies to what Coke did, which was a great campaign, and also Bonds, but we've got our own twists on that."

Qantas will set up photo kiosks at Westfield shopping centres in Chatswood (July 5-8), Bondi Junction (July 12-15) and Doncaster (July 12-15) where people will be able to get a hair and make-up 'touch up' and a professional photo to be used to participate in the campaign.

The airline has also created special Qantas You apps for the iPhone and iPad plus Android devices, and developed what it claims to be world-first 'personalised banner ads' placed on selected websites, which will show your submitted picture in the advertisement.

This will be followed in early July with digital billboards, including a 3.5m display at Sydney's Town Hall railway station, where people using the Qantas You app will automatically see their name and photo appear in the displayed Qantas ad.

But they still call Australia home

However, Pullen is quick to assure that Qantas' iconic "I still call Australia home" campaign - which launched over a dozen years ago, with the Sydney Olympics in 2000 - isn't being put out to pasture.

"There's no doubt customers love it and it will still play an important role for us, especially around national occasions" Pullen says. "It's very much our 'national anthem'."

As part of the campaign, Qantas has also subtly changed the slogan on the sides of two aircraft from "Spirit of Australia" to "Spirit of Australians", as featured in the video below.

Avoiding the #QantasLuxury #fail

Following the trainwreck of last year's ill-timed #QantasLuxury contest on Twitter, Pullen is well aware of the risks involved with asking people to submit a name or a photo which will then be used in advertising.

"One thing I would say is we're had a lot of experience in that area!" he admits. "But we've gone through risk assessment with this, we have things in place to make sure it's not abused. There is a 24 hour period where we will assess the name and picture before publishing it.

"We're confident that we have enough safeguards to do this well but also have a lot of fun with it. We've also gone through a lot of legal terms and conditions to get this right and respect people's privacy. I think it's a fairly innocent campaign."

"This is just the first stage of the campaign, encouraging people to get involved and be part of the conversation" Pullen adds. "It build to a crescendo after the Olympics, to a final phase that's about substantiating our brand proposition - that you're the reason we fly."
What's your take on the new Qantas tagline? Have your say in the comments area below or shout out on Twitter: we're @AusBT .

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
by David Flynn | June 29, 2012 Qantas is set to embark on a multi-million dollar advertising campaign built around the new tagline "You're the reason we fly". The campaign will include the airline's biggest ever social media push, which will include emblazoning the names of thousands of Australians onto the side of a Qantas Airbus A380 and Boeing 737.

# data[].attributes.body
Here is a very interesting interview of Leonardo O’ Grady, ASEAN Director of Integrated Marketing Communications for Coca-Cola. He describes his experience working with eYeka’s community of creative.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
[Case Study] Coca-Cola & eYeka: Interpreting "Energizing Refreshment" (short version)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Coca-Cola engaged eYeka to gather fresh expressions of its brand promise: "Energizing refreshment" through videos, animations, illustrations and photographs that could be used in its marketing campaigns worldwide. In this short video, Leonardo O' Grady, ASEAN Director of Integrated Marketing Communications for Coca-Cola describes his experience working with eYeka's community of creative consumers.

# data[].attributes.body
Coca-Cola also asked the crowd to submit logos. However, one big problem is that they retained the rights of every participants, even the non-winners. Thus, Coca-Cola could use freely any design made by people who spent a lot of time on it. That is not very fair, knowing that Coca-Cola is the most valuable brand in the world, generating billions of dollars each year.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Coca-Cola has teamed up with Blank You Very Much (BYVM) to launch a contest, for U.S. residents only, to redesign the brands most famous assets, which will be used on limited edition BYVM t-shirts and more.

The contest has strict rules and guidelines which you need to follow in order to win the 5,000$ Judge's Choice grand prize. The guidelines are as follows:

* The archival assets selected as part of the asset pack cannot be altered or distorted in any way
* The Coca-Cola® logo can only be presented in Red and White - (Blue is expressly forbidden)
* Do not crop logo
* No international logos or flags may be used
* Must include the trademark sign
* When using the Coca-Cola® script it can only be placed horizontal and vertical - vertical script has to run from south to north
* The dynamic ribbon logo can only run horizontally
* Outline of the contour bottle needs to be pristine
* If any photography is used in the design, it cannot be of anyone other than the designer
* No children under the age of 13 may be used in photography
* Design theme should always reflect a balanced, healthy lifestyle
* All designs should be targeted to a 12 years and older demographic

Contest ends on October 29, and between October 30 and November 12 the BYVM community will vote on the submitted designs. The selected finalists will be judged by a panel of design experts.

Images: blankyouverymuch.com
Now, lets read the fine print. "Entrant irrevocably and in perpetuity assigns to The Coca-Cola Company all worldwide right, title and interest in and to any Creation. A Creation means any concept, artwork, design, image, model, or the like produced and submitted by Entrant. The Coca-Cola Company has the sole and exclusive right to apply, reproduce, prepare derivative works, distribute copies, perform, display and license submitted Creations, without any obligation, financial or otherwise, to the Entrant."
This means that Coca-Cola holds rights to ALL of the submitted designs, not just the grand prize winner.
"In addition, Entrants acknowledges that BYVM, and The Coca-Cola Company bear no responsibility to the Entrants in relation to the use of the Creations or elements of the Creation, even if said Creations or elements of the Creation substantially resemble or are identical to their submission."
Your work, or any part of it can be used in future campaigns and you have no personal gain. This has sparked a lot of interest among the design community, and comments on BYVM an numerous sites say the same: Why does a huge company like Coca-Cola (recently voted 1# global brand) retain rights to the non-winners also? This looks like pure misuse of thousands of work hours by designers. Thoughts?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Coca-Cola Crowdsources for New Logo | Brandingmag

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Coca-Cola has teamed up with Blank You Very Much (BYVM) to launch a contest, for U.S. residents only, to redesign the brands most famous assets, which will be used on limited edition BYVM t-shirts and more. The contest has strict rules and guidelines which you need to follow in order to win the 5,000$ Judge's Choice grand prize.

# data[].attributes.body
Coca-Cola decided to ask its consumers to create a short film. They received more than 3 000 submissions, which is enormous. Moreover, some of the videos were very qualitative, which is quite amazing.

The interview below is very interesting as it helps us understand how Coca-Cola used crowdsourcing to "crack" its positioning and get new perspectives. At first, it was an experiment but it turned out to be very positive for Coca-Cola. There were some very creative videos. Another interesting thing to know is that they didn't use the most creative or their favourite video for ad campaigns. They chose the one which was the most "on-brief".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When Coca-Cola's ad agencies ran out of ideas for a marketing brief, the company decided to turn to an online community to crowdsource some ideas.
By using co-creation Coca-Cola was able to generate thousands of new ideas from a global community of creative individuals, giving it a huge amount of content to inspire future marketing activities.

And the drinks brand isn't the only major business using co-creation. BMW has a minisite that allows people to contribute to its current projects.

So to find out more about why Coca-Cola moved away from the traditional agency model and its on-going work with co-creation community eYeka, I spoke to the Asia Pacific regional director for sparkling and activation platforms Leonardo O'Grady...

Why did you first decide to use co-creation?

Obviously Coke is accustomed to seeing consumer-generated content as we have huge online communities, but it's always been seen as a way to drive engagement rather than a possible source for brand building or for external messaging.

It was originally something we did on a big scale in Asia, but was largely done as an experiment.

We had trouble cracking some positioning for Coke, so thought we would open it up and invite the creative community to interpret this brief as our agencies were having some difficulty.

And it was kind of a win-win for us, because even if we don't get content that we can pick up and use right away we knew we'd have a number of new perspectives on a common brief that we could use to develop our own ideas.

So we opened it up internationally to Latin America, Asia and North America, and we got responses from them all.

So it was to try and get marketing content rather than a new product?

Exactly, it was positioning for Coke and we invited people to create a film, print, illustration or animation against that brief.

The results were amazing; we had around 3,600 responses, which we weren't expecting at all.

We were also blown away by the quality of the submissions and to be honest some of the film quality was better than we get from our global agency partners.

How did you pick a winner?

In the end we got it down to about 10 high quality submissions to choose the winner from, and to make it more interesting we invited the creative directors and heads of marketing from some big companies like Diageo, Nokia and so on to come and evaluate the work.

Our Chinese office then picked it up and they used the winning idea for a broader consumer commercial idea.

They invited Chinese consumers to interpret the brief in their own way and do China proud, and they had something like 1m people contribute ideas.

So did you use the ads from eYeka in your marketing activities?

We aired one of the winning ads in Asia, which probably wasn't the most stunning creatively but was very on-brief.

What was the most surprising result from using co-creation?

We had three measures for success and I think what was most interesting was that we achieved great results against all of them.

Firstly, we wanted to get a significant amount of content that we could use, and we got more than 3,000 submissions.

Then we also needed it to be high enough quality that we could air it and be proud of it, and it absolutely was.

And thirdly would it test well against some of our commissioned work from agencies? To find out we tested it on our standard protocols using Millward Brown's Link score and the winning team came in the top 10% of ads globally.

The winning ad outperformed a lot of our commissioned work, so it paid of very well for us across all criteria.

Furthermore, we achieved something like a 900% productivity gain against briefing through traditional means.

That's if you compare all the costs of using co-creation versus our usual agency and production fees for just one piece of copy, never mind 3,600.

So how is it costed? Did you pay per response or one overall cost?

We paid a flat fee that includes tapping into the creative community with the brief, responding to any questions and then some prize money for the winners.

How does social media tie into co-creation?

The whole process is very social by nature, as the brief goes out and there's a conversation around it within the creative community.

Then you begin to get the slow trickling in of content and they're all looking at one another's work and commenting on it.

Some of it also ends up being posted on the web outside the eYeka community, so other consumers then also respond to that.

As a result some of the creatives take their work away and improve it, so through that whole period you can see that the content is continually evolving due to the discussions in the community, which is just phenomenal to watch.

Why not just use your 54m Facebook fans? Does co-creation with a creative community mean you get higher quality content?

I can't judge the Facebook community because they're so great, but I think it comes down to finding people who actually want to generate content.

With eYeka people have opted in to be asked to create an idea, and I would be reluctant to solicit too much from people on Facebook.

In general there's a small group of people in the world who want to create and come up with content, then there's another group who want to curate content, but the mass of people just want to judge.

I think on Facebook it's probably a better environment to have people judge and evaluate.

And that's probably part of the reason that people become Facebook fans of Coke, as they want to be able to influence some of those decisions.

Did you find out anything surprising about what consumers think about the Coke brand?

It was interesting to see so many different interpretations of the brief, and see the discussions around what other people thought was on-brand or off-brand.

And we use some of the things we learned when briefing our internal teams and our external agencies.

Also, we're aware that we don't have the same control over the brand image that we used to, as consumers are easily able to create their ideas and upload them on the web.

So with that in mind, we found it interesting that there's the possibility of outsourcing work to this community that understands the brand and that we can engage to help develop and create ideas for us.

It's an amazing demonstration of how creativity is becoming democratised when you're creating a brand.

It allows us to find the right people out there and work with them to develop content rather than commissioning specific pieces of work.

Who retains control over the responses? Could someone stick it on YouTube if they wanted?

I suppose we could place strict controls on the content we receive, but we didn't and we don't plan to. A lot of the stuff is put on blogs or on film sites, which then generates more conversations and reactions.

One project we did focused on Coke's energy credentials and if you Googled Coke and energy all these videos came up from all of these creators.

But this wasn't something we paid for, this was natural search results.

So allowing people to have freedom over what they do with the content creates conversations and engagement that we could never commission.

We think it's fantastic, and we're very lucky that people care about the brand enough to create this content and put it out there with their name on it. And that's the kind of thing that you don't want to shutdown.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Coca-Cola uses co-creation to crowdsource new marketing ideas

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When Coca-Cola's ad agencies ran out of ideas for a marketing brief, the company decided to turn to an online community to crowdsource some ideas.

# data[].attributes.body
The problem may have been that an agency changed the initial logo. It then became too conceptual (cf. article below).

I think that when you use crowdsourcing, you have to find something that pleases the crowd. Otherwise, you just do it on your own with professional agencies. It is normal that people reacted on the web.

This example shows that crowdsourcing is inevitably linked to internet and social media. Crowdsourcing isn't always approved by the public, even if it's a good initiative to make the crowd participate. This highlights one of the disadvantages of crowdsourcing: the fact that it is sometimes complicated to use the designs/results of the competition. Here, they chose to "improve" it with a design agency, but might have regretted it afterwards.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Madrid 2020 logo causes controversy | Logo Design Love

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Madrid launched its bid for the 2020 Olympics yesterday with a logo that left many Spaniards confused (as reported in The Telegraph).

# data[].attributes.body
After its release, the logo wasn't particularly popular in Spain. Indeed, many people didn't agree on this choice and they didn't understand it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"To me it is confusing and naff," tweeted Pedro J Ramirez, the editor of El Mundo newspaper.

The logo was designed by Luis Peiret, 22, a graphic arts student from Zaragoza and chosen in a competition by the Spanish Olympic Committee.

Reports said he had intended the script to say M20 but when officials modified the logo they trimmed the bottom of the design leading to the visual confusion.

Bizarrely even the colours used to represent the Olympic Rings were not faithful to the original with pink being chosen to replace black, the colour meant to symbolise the African continent.

A poll on the website of Spain's leading daily newspaper El Pais Monday afternoon asked readers how much they liked the new logo. 81 per cent replied: "not at all".

It will be the fourth bid for candidacy by Madrid which argues that it is the largest European capital never to have played host.

Despite the deep economic crisis engulfing Spain, support for the bid is strong with recent polls showing 84 per cent of Spaniards wanting Madrid to play host while 91 per cent think it will create new jobs.

"The Government is supporting the candidacy of the capital for the 2020 Olympics," said Soraya Sáenz de Santamaría, the country's Deputy Prime Minister.

"We want to give support to Madrid 2020 to help build the momentum behind Brand Spain and help generate trust and confidence in our country."

Other cities expected to apply on February 15 to host the 2020 Games include Tokyo, Rome, Istanbul, Baku in Azerbaijan and Doha in Qatar.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Madrid launches bid for 2020 Olympics with bizarre logo that says 20020

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"To me it is confusing and naff," tweeted Pedro J Ramirez, the editor of El Mundo newspaper. The logo was designed by Luis Peiret, 22, a graphic arts student from Zaragoza and chosen in a competition by the Spanish Olympic Committee.

# data[].attributes.headline
No prize money -> less designs and lower engagement

# data[].attributes.subject
No prize money -> less designs and lower engagement

# data[].attributes.body
However, you don't have to see it only in a bad way. I think that Barack Obama's primary objective was to use crowdsourcing to build connections and to interact with citizens. Unfortunately, this failed and he didn't really manage to raise awareness of his plan to create more jobs for US citizens. The prize for the three finalists was posters signed by Obama and framed, with copies sold to raise money for the campaign.

Below, you can see the website (in partnership with Artworks) which was created for the poster design crowdsourcing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This movement needs you now more than ever. Join a long line of progressive organizers in the fight for a better future.

# data[].attributes.body
A tweet from Niki Bivona (@nikibivona) on Twitter said it all:

RT @nospec http://my.barackobama.com/page/s/artworks-submissionObama is now crowdsourcing a poster, about job creation. Irony.

Then, other people complained on the web that if Obama wanted to support American jobs, he should actually pay designers to do his campaign posters instead of using crowdsourcing as a free solution.

# data[].attributes.body
This article below is interesting as it shows the consequences of Greenpeace's crowdsourcing on social media. It also highlights the fact that people share a lot of content on the web without checking its authenticity.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Spoof site, or headline grabbing awareness campaign? Whatever it is, Shell and Greenpeace are fast becoming a Twitter trend today.

The bogus Arctic Ready web site, has been inviting crowdsourced headlines for its 'Shell in the Arctic' 'campaign'. The associated Twitter account @arcticready claims to be committed to clean and safe Arctic energy.

Contributors are invited to add captions to images of the Arctic.

Credit: Arctic Ready

Captions added to the images appeared on the site:

Credit: Arctic Ready

The Twitter account, @ShellisPrepared created on 17th July 2012, has been responding to comments with seemingly automated responses such as:

We're glad you're excited by the campaign but please do not share offensive ads.

The site will be down for maintenance until we remove all offensive ads.

Our team is working overtime to remove inappropriate ads. Please stop sharing them.

Please don't share offensive ads. We're working to remove them.

Please, please, please stop sharing inflammatory ads

Our tech team is working to remove subversive ads.

The web site had not removed any of the 'offensive' images. Tweets stopped at 11.30 PST -- bed time on te the west coast of Canada and with only 240 tweets, the account is still gaining momentum -- and followers.

Update at (01:15 a.m. PST): The Twitter account has now been suspended.

The web site, and Twitter accounts do not belong to Shell. A quick search on Whois for arcticready.com shows that the site is registered to a P.O. Box in Vancouver, with contact details redirecting to a privacypost.com email address.

The web site also looks fake. The copy does not follow the style, tone and manner of the copy in the Shell web site.

Know your meme reckons it is:

A mock advertising campaign created by Greenpeace and The Yes Men in June 2012. The hoax consisted of an elaborately staged gaffe at a fake event arranged on behalf of Shell Oil Company, a mock website purported as the company's social media hubsite and a fake press release alleging that Shell's lawyers are considering legal actions against the involved parties.

Greenpeace activists shut down 74 petrol stations in London and Edinburgh on Mondayof this week in a protest against the company's plans to drill for oil in the Arctic.

Greenpeace are good at generating awareness using social channels. Nestle were in the news over a co-ordinated attack on Facebook a couple of years ago.

Greenpeace are taking advantage of the ease of social sharing. We share links, images and content without checking authenticity. We read updates from our trusted friends and by default we believe those links to be true and authentic.

Unfortunately, more and more of these memes are appearing. We could soon become jaded with more of the same old news regurgitated over and over again.

The very thing that Greenpeace is trying to do -- raise awareness of environmental issues -- is the same thing that will turn us away from a cause worth caring about -- if we are hoaxed too often.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Fake Shell site crowdsourced ads raise awareness about Arctic drilling | ZDNet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Spoof site, or headline grabbing awareness campaign? Whatever it is, Shell and Greenpeace are fast becoming a Twitter trend today. The bogus Arctic Ready web site, has been inviting crowdsourced headlines for its 'Shell in the Arctic' 'campaign'. The associated Twitter account @arcticready claims to be committed to clean and safe Arctic energy.

# data[].attributes.body
Greenpeace used crowdsourcing to generate creative ideas and raise awareness. It's not the first time that Greenpeace uses crowdsourcing to praise its ideas. Indeed, relying on crowd to share some content and ideas seem to work very well for them.

The crowd created some very funny advertising. Greenpeace reached their goal: they made people talk about the issues of arctic drilling. It was quite controversial though as Shell's reputation must have suffered from this crowdsourcing project. Moreover, Shell was quite powerless here. I don't think that they could legally attack Greenpeace for this. Or at least, they couldn't act immediately against Greenpeace to stop them.

Crowdsourcing allowed Greenpeace to generate ideas very fast about a hot topic. Indeed, Internet is very fast as content can be shared multiple times on blogs, on Twitter, Facebook , etc. It seems like a perfect way to get reactions as people like to express themselves on the web.

# data[].attributes.body
The Australian airline Qantas made a campain called "You're the reason we fly". It involved crowdsourcing thousands of photos from Australians to use in a TV commercial as well as names to display on the sides of selected Qantas planes.

# data[].attributes.headline
A controversial example: MADRID OLYMPICS 2020

# data[].attributes.subject
A controversial example: MADRID OLYMPICS 2020

# data[].attributes.body
In January, Madrid revealed their logo for their 2020 Olympics bid. It was crowdsourced via a country-wide design contest. The winner earned €6,000 which is quite a low cost for a logo that important (the London Olympic’s 2012 logo cost £400,000).

Unfortunately, this crowdsourcing project caused controversy as it appears to read "20020" rather than "2020".

# data[].attributes.body
In June 2012, Greenpeace ran a contest with The Yes Men to get satirical and subversive advertisements, using Shell's own social media and ad campains.

Greenpeace decided to target an oil company; they created a spoof Shell site http://arcticready.com/arctic to crowdsource environmental activism.

# data[].attributes.body
During the 2012 election campaign, President Obama decided to crowdsource poster design ideas to promote jobs in America.

Unfortunately, the campaign was a mistake and had a disastrous impact on social media. Indeed, the goal of the advertising was to promote jobs in America but Obama didn't offer prize money or payment for the winners of the contest.

Despite this, this type of crowdsourcing - user-generated advertising - delivered very creative and quality designs.

# data[].attributes.body
With the help of the co-creation community eYeka, the n°1 brand Coca-Cola used crowdsourcing several times in 2012, looking for innovation.

# data[].attributes.body
Crowdsourcing is often used as a tool for small businesses and entrepreneurs. In the last 5 years, small businesses have experienced extraordinary growth thanks to crowdsourcing services.

In 2012, crowdsourcing became really popular in marketing circles and with big brands.
Brands, governments, celebrities and politicians took the example of small businesses and also tried crowdsourcing to leverage the creativity and intelligence of the crowd. However, it didn't always go as planned.
I am going to study 5 brands / institutions that tested crowdsourcing.

# data[].attributes.body
most people are often working for free. If they are paid, they often earn less with crowdsourcing

anybody can enter the crowdsourcing site (all Internet users, this includes competitors or unqualified people) -> less credible products, compared to professionals

loss of copyrights for participants

may have a negative effect on labour

firms may take advantage of Internet users who just want to have fun or are willing to help

some projects never get a concrete realization

no real structure -> companies can lose control of the project

companies have to manage a large scale of workers / it can be difficult to make crowd members collaborate (they are inclined to compete)

# data[].attributes.body
crowdsourcing projects proceed online => can address to an unlimited number of recipients

a crowd of individuals can provide solutions superior in quality / if they are put in the right conditions, groups are often smarter than an individual only

user groups cooperate in order to reach the project goal

allows communication in a decentralized way

the initiator of crowdsourcing has often free rights on the value created

offers great opportunities for participants (work on a huge project, with well-known brands...) that can be useful for the CV / entrepreneurs have a chance to make a reputation

can solve problems and fosters the innovation process

enhances the relationship between organizations and customers

cuts down on organizational costs for companies by "capturing" the talent and time of others -> good for startups (low budget)

well-suited for simple tasks

# data[].attributes.body
A lot of social media like Pinterest or Twitter talk about crowdsourcing.

# data[].attributes.headline
6 tips when investing in crowdsourcing projects

# data[].attributes.subject
6 tips when investing in crowdsourcing projects

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The immediacy and global reach of the Internet has given a whole new meaning to making a difference, and crowdsourcing is leading the charge.

For the uninitiated, crowdsourcing is a way for people to support causes they believe in by pledging donations through websites dedicated to funding socially-conscious, creative and innovative projects.

Visitors to crowdsourcing websites like Kickstarter, Microplace, and FirstGiving can view pitches from fledgling inventors and entrepreneurs looking to turn their ideas into actual products or raise money for worthy causes. These and other similar websites facilitate passing the plate through cyber society, allowing users to make direct payments--even as little as $1--to projects that have set goal amounts and specific deadlines to raise the cash. If a project's funding goal isn't met in the allotted time, donors aren't charged for their pledges.

The websites are prolific, sometimes raising millions of dollars in just days. As a result of fundraising efforts on these sites, old theaters have escaped the wrecking ball, Academy Award-nominated films have been produced and community gardens have grown.

One example: actor Seth Rogen has used the Crowdrise website to raise money for Alzheimer's research. Current crowdsourcing campaigns are collecting money for things like a mini radiation detector and bluetooth earbuds. Want to support healthy eating? A tiny vegan bakery is tapping into crowdsourcing for help in expanding its distribution.

There's no denying that crowdsourcing has so far been a boon for noble causes and clever entrepreneurs alike - Kickstarter alone has received more than $500 million in pledges from more than 3 million people for more than 35,000 projects in the last four years. But is it really a smart way for people to donate?

The answer, for the most part, is yes, with the usual caveat: benefactor beware.

Here are a few tips to make your crowdsourcing donations as meaningful as possible.

1. Find the right website. A few crowdsourcing websites specialize in raising money for charitable projects or causes (like Crowdrise), and others concentrate on funding fledgling businesses (like Chaordix).Try to choose the websites that best fit your intended giving target. Use crowdsourcing.org as a resource for a full list of websites, the latest news and information on the industry.

2. Read up on the recipients. Just as in conventional fundraising, prospective donors should vet each pitch to make sure the needy cause is legit and the money will go directly to the intended project. Prospective donors should look at the links and background information usually provided by project creators with their pitches. And since each must offer contact information, it's advisable to ask them questions directly if you are unsure of something.

3. Learn the rules. Each platform has its own unique structure and rules for giving and receiving money. Some websites take a percentage of funds donated if the funding goal is reached--Kickstarter keeps 5 percent, but keeps nothing if the project fails to meet its goal amount. Others charge project creators a fee for using the service whether the goal is met or not. Projects on Rockethub pay the site 4 percent of their successfully completed goals and 9 percent if they fail to attract enough donations. Either way, donor pledges aren't taken by the websites unless the project goal amount is reached.

4. Check for allowable deductions. There are usually no tax deductions for donating money through most crowdsourcing sites. However, some projects started by or with a 501(c)(3) organization may offer tax deductions. To find out if the organization affiliated with the projects are truly qualified as not-for-profit, check out its tax-exempt status at the IRS website.

5. Consult an advisor for large donations. While putting a few bucks into a crowdsourcing project with your credit card won't have much effect on your finances, larger donations to these websites--like any big charitable, philanthropic or estate giving--should be checked out with a trusted financial advisor.

6. Give your expertise. Do-gooders don't always have to reach into their pockets. A website called Sparked offers "social business solutions," where donors lend a hand to nonprofits online with things like graphic design, web development and social media marketing.

Some crowdsourcing projects and causes offer donors incentives like a t-shirt, cap, or product sample. But that's usually not the reason for giving. For most, the motive for donating is simply philanthropic and the opportunity to help advance an idea the donor believes in. The real reward for crowdsourcing participation is the chance to give back and be part of a community of giving, a unique opportunity to join together with millions of other like-minded folks looking to make a difference.
David Winzelberg is an award-winning reporter who spent 20 years writing for the New York Times. He currently writes exclusive stories for Long Island Business News.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
6 Tips When Investing In Crowdsourcing Projects

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There's no denying that crowdsourcing has so far been a boon for noble causes and clever entrepreneurs alike - But is it really a smart way for people to donate? The answer, for the most part, is yes, with the usual caveat: benefactor beware.

# data[].attributes.body
"the practice of obtaining needed services, ideas, or content by soliciting contributions from a large group of people and especially from the online community rather than from traditional employees or suppliers" Merriam Dictionary

"obtain (information or input into a particular task or project) by enlisting the services of a number of people, either paid or unpaid, typically via the Internet" Oxford Dictionary

"In crowdsourcing, a community or 'crowd' - often organized online - is invited to participate in tasks typically completed by organizations or by specialists. A call to a crowd might seek to
generate a large volume of content, or to lessen the burden of a task by distributing it among many people. Those using crowdsourcing techniques assume that putting a problem to a large group increases the likelihood of generating an important innovation." Hana Shepherd, 2012