As I was doing some research for one of my other projects this semester, looking into the logistics and supply chain management of humanitarian aid and disaster relief, I happened to stumble across two blogs which caught my interest. Both J from Tales from the Hood and Brett Keller discuss "The Machine Gun Preacher", who identifies himself as a mercenary/missionary. While I must admit he is doing good by setting up orphanages in Sudan, and helping children in need, I disagree with his method. He chooses to carry guns, and fights alongside the SPLA. The main issue many people have had with this is that he is creating an image of humanitarian aid workers that could potentially further endanger the lives of other aid workers. Consider this article recently released by DW-World.
The big issue is that currently a movie is being made about The Machine gun preacher. When we talk about movies, and the impacts they may have, we can see that the movie "The Machine Gun Preacher", with a 40million dollar budget, a famous international hollywood star in Gerard Butler, and an Oscar-nominated directorin Marc Forster certainly has the potential to draw in a lot of viewers. In comparison, I would like to refer to a different movie which I happened to see recently, by Sorious Samura.
Here is the description of the movie from the website:
"Award-winning journalist Sorious Samura is increasingly gaining a reputation for a new kind of journalism which not many others can do. It’s ‘real’ reality TV – stories that offer a unique perspective into the lives of people facing terrible situations. On this journey he set out to become, for all intents and purposes, a refugee. He traveled to Chad to live with a family in a refugee camp for one month. He lived under exactly the same conditions, eating what they ate, drinking what they drank. Sorious built close intimate relationships with the people in this situation sharing their hopes and fears. This film provides a unique insight into what life is really like for a refugee."
So, to bring a social media twist into this, i want you guys to start thinking about online reviews. I will get more into this in my next blog post in the next few days, but how damaging can bad reviews online be?
In my opinion online reviews are a really helpful and also powerful source. But it really depends on the product being reviewed.
ReplyDeleteFor example when I bought my LCD TV, I read more than a hundred of reviews online, before making the final purchase. The features compared and reviewed are kind of objective and clear.
But related to movies, sometimes it is only a personal subjective view, and therefore a "bad" review is not really helpful nor representative.
From my personal perspective I only believe in positive movie reviews and never trust in negative ones. Until I personally got the proof.
Bad reviews have always been damaging to brands/products, even before the days of social media. Movies have always relied on WoM. The main issue today, however, is that the reviews, both good and bad, spread VERY quickly. The first few hours after a movie is released are crucial to its success. I'll make a decision whether or not to see a new film based on what my Twitter feed says! In the past, this process took days or weeks, rather than hours.
ReplyDeleteAre any other product categories as time-critical as movies?