Church of the Customer Blog
« Star Trek citizen marketers raise $3 million | Main | Making Apple's Genius Bar smarter »
March 06, 2005
Star Trek citizen marketers raise $3 million
Three anonymous donors contributed $3 million this week to Trek United, a grassroots effort to save the TV show "Star Trek: Enterprise." (Read my Feb. 19 post about the group.)
Three million dollars is a remarkable donation by any measure, much less an effort to save a television show. The donors wrote a mini-manifesto to accompany their donation:
We are in the commercial space flight industry and would like to testify that at least one out of two of all the actual entrepreneurs involved in this industry has been inspired by Star Trek; and we are not only good at watching TV sci-fi , we are also good at writing checks, big checks. The people airing this kind of TV have a responsibility; inspiration.
It seems the Trek United organizers have a lot more juice behind their efforts now.
UPDATE: The Feb. 19 blog post has spurred a discussion among some of the Trek United activists about its work. One thing that's missing from Trek United's work: An RSS feed.
Other blogs that reference Star Trek citizen marketers raise $3 million:
» advant
from Lars Goran Olousson
Star Trek citizen mark... [Read More]
As a Star Trek fan, I believe the franchise is tired. However, there are options besides broadcast television where die-hard Trekkies can focus their efforts to keep the franchise alive.
With DVDs having proven themselves to be a viable revenue stream, I recommend Paramount bypass television altogether and release new episode pods on DVD.
The Wall Street Journal wrote a nice article (Feb. 22 issue) on how DVD sales are helping to stave off cancellation for TV shows on the bubble like “Arrested Development” and “Jack & Bobby.” Broadcast networks are willing to trade low ratings today for high DVD sales tomorrow. In essence, the networks are airing low-rated shows as advertisements in hopes they can gather enough die-hard fans to make the DVD release payoff.
But Star Trek fans are already mobilized. That’s why a DVD-only release of Enterprise may be a financially viable way Paramount can keep the Trek franchise alive.
Or … Paramount could do first-run PPV showings of new Enterprise episodes and then package the PPV-only showings for release on DVD.
With that said, I believe Paramount does need to rest the Star Trek story for a few years. The storylines are just too tired for me these days.
I'm sorry, but with everything going on in the world, donating $3 million to save Star Trek is a real shame. I really like Star Trek, but ratings are ratings. I can't believe someone would make such a large donation to save a television show. If I were Trek United, I'd turn around and donate that money to organizations that help kids get more interested in science. What a waste of money. If I were homeless, and pulled a newspaper out of a garbage can to read that someone gave $3 million to Star Trek, I think I'd cry.
Charlie: That's why I have strongly protested Ben and Jackie's careless suggestion of "citizen marketer" terminology a few weeks ago as here:
http://customerevangelists.typepad.com/blog/2005/02/citizen_markert.html
and here:
http://customerevangelists.typepad.com/blog/2005/02/saving_star_tre.html
What these particular StarTrek fans do has nothing to do with citizenship. Psychologists would probably call it a clinical nutcase. Sadly, this kind of association subverts and cheapens the original meaning of the word 'citizenship'. Why Ben and Jackie insist on this usage is beyond me.
I like John's idea. If we are to agree that television has surpassed its usefulness as a marketing vehicle (regardless of subjective discussions about content relevance, as "The Long Tail" tells us), it seems the time has arrived for web-based broadcasts to take over. This seems especially possible for shows with a well-established, if niche, audience.
The DVD still retains its role for the immediate future, which is to present the show in high-definition, function as a totem of ownership/affiliation and deliver behind-the-scenes content not found in the webisodes.
Charlie -- I guess inspiration is relevant.
By the way, how do you explain the fact that this latest and biggest donation has come from a group of people whose real motives are blatantly commercial: the development of the commercial space flight industry. It's like reviving a war show with most generous donations from Halliburton and Raytheon. I don't see where the citizenship in this is and how come these 'citizen marketers' don't even critically debate, deliberate, and vote on, as 'citizens' would typically do, whether to accept such a major donation from a commercially motivated interest group.
To the contrary (as usual, Kerimcan), there is discussion and deliberation among the group.
That a group like this has organized under authentic pretenses (rather than as an organized marketing gimmick sponsored by a corporation) to protest the decision of Paramount is not unlike political rallying, just like what citizens sometimes do.
Is it identical to a political rally? Of course not. But the Trek United people believe in their cause and volunteer their time, whether you callously dismiss them as "nutcases" or not, Kerimcan.
Yes, there has been discussion and deliberation among the group. Not about this particular mega-donation, though. Kind of curious huh?
If you do some background research on this, you will find that the $3 million donation was negotiated in full secrecy and then imposed top-down with a surprise announcement.
http://www.trekunited.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=1140
http://www.trekunited.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=1186
No prior public debate or deliberation whatsoever. It's a perfect fait-accompli. Is this your concept of citizen marketing? Top-down, stealthy, exploitative...
Yeah, this definitely falls in the "find out the full story before getting too excited" category. I actually think this does more to harm the Star Trek franchise/community than it does to help.
Most people, including Ben (?) aren't going to stop to fully research where most of this money came from our what the motivations were. They're going to assume that "whack job ST fans disregarded Tsunami victims, Dafur refugees, soldiers, and focused on their silly little needs". What the ST community really needs is more viewers, and you can't attract new viewers is not by making the current viewers seem like crazies.
As Clay Shirky said (about something a bit different), a group is its own worst enemy.
http://www.shirky.com/writings/group_enemy.html
Jake, I'm not so sure. I think the ST fans are doing exactly what comes naturally to them in the context of their group's culture and history.
Your religion, hobbies or favorite websites may seem crazy to others but inspiring to you. Does that make you a wack-job?
OK, first off, I'm not saying they ARE whackjobs... rather, I'm saying they are/can be perceived as whackjobs. Those are two drastically different things. (Everyone's hobby/interest is wierd to most other people)
Secondly, as ST fans aren't donating $3 million dollars - the commercial space flight industry is. It's incorrect to say that the "fans" have donated this much money. Fans have donated $105,000. Nothing to shake a stick at, but certainly not $3.1 million.
My point was that the reality is that in order to convince Paramount to continue on with ST, bringing a one time shot of $3 million, while certainly interesting, isn't that significant (how much does one episode cost?). What would really be significant is bringing new viewers. THAT is something that Paramount would respond to. After all, is the commercial space industry going to donate $3 million + every season? And are they also going to kick in to expand the franchise?
I am someone who believes 100% in the power of community. I work with fans and fan groups for a living. I have the utmost respect for them and their activities, and refuse to believe that they're weird simply because of their interests.
But I also work for a company who hasn't fully come around to the "community" mindset yet (although I'm making progress in leaps and bounds). I've seen both the fan reactions as well as my colleagues' reactions to the fans.
There's a bigger picture that most fans/fan groups completely and totally miss most of the time. In this case, I seriously wonder if the ST fans thought through the entire process here. I doubt it, and perhaps that doesn't matter.
I don't think this is as much a great story of citizen marketing, as much as a great story about the new face of TV/general advertising (which is really the reason that the commercial space industry has stepped up). It's a great story from that perspective and shows the changing nature of how commercial entities can work with consumers (not necessarily THEIR consumers) to get their message out to a willing audience in a way that will actually be retained.
... and all that said, I certainly suppose there's a case to be made for pressuring, bribing, pushing, and prodding an industry/company into doing what you, as the consumer, want them to do.
I'm not saying that this is all bad, just that it's not the 1-2 punch the original post made it sound like.
Jake: I didn't say all Trekies are nutcases. When I first used that term it was to refer to that guy who made it his mission to visit every Starbucks store on the face of the earth (an earlier thread on this blog). Second time I used it on this thread to refer to the anonymous donors who gave $3 million for the campaign, not quite knowing that they were actually from the space flight industry. I thought they were just regular trekies throwing money out of unselfish enthusiasm. That would have been real nutcase. An industry group acting as a big money interest group is just that, an interest group, not a nutcase. Anyway, it is not an example of 'citizen marketer' by any stretch of imagination. On the contrary, the way the deal was struck in secrecy and announced fait-accompli debunks the entire theory that the Star Trek community is a citizen movement.
Kerimcan, I didn't say you (or anyone here) said that Trekkies were nutcases. My entire point was that there is a perception in the world from non-Trekkies that Trekkies are a bit ...odd. I'm not saying I agree with that, because I don't (when people say this about Trekkies, adult LEGO fans, or any other hobby group, I always ask "What's your hobby?"... usually shuts them up).
In this Long Tail world, interests can be as varied and wide as imagination itself, making their departure from the masses more pronounced than ever.
Let's save ad hominem terms like "nutcase" or "wack-job" for people who really deserve it, like bloggers and business book authors!
Jake: I don't think that Trekkies in general are odd either. They are like all other fans, enthusiasts, hobbyists of all colors. It's alright for people to live in alternate realities. Most of us actually do as in left vs. right of political spectrum, northside vs. southside of Chicago, etc.
However, for a Trekkie to sell his entire estate and donate it to save the enterprise would be quite crazy. Fortunately, or rather unfortunately, it is a special interest group which donated $3 million for the cause. Now that changes the whole nature of this movement as it represents 30 times the amount that was collected hitherto.
At any rate, I expressed my strong opposition to the proposed term "citizen marketing" for the reasons explained in previous threads. I would be interested to hear your thoughts about this term itself.
How exactly does the big donation change "the whole nature" of the group's work?
AAAAHHHH!!!! I'm not saying that people ARE nutcases or whackjobs... I'm saying that there's a very very real PERCEPTION of Trekkies as nutcases. Donating (at least in theory) $3 million to save a TV show increases this PERCEPTION of Trekkies as nutcases. Sorry to sound frustrated, but I feel like I'm going in circles. I'm not calling Trekkies weird!!
Ben, taking at stab at your last question - do you honestly think that the commercial space industry donating #3 million in order to further their VERY corporate goals falls under the "citizen marketing" category? If so, I'd be interested to hear your definition of citizen marketing (not a loaded statement, just honestly interested, as I think we have two different definitions).
So you guys helped get us started on an RSS feed? That actually led to the creation of the unofficial Trek United blog: http://www.grangeonline.co.uk/tu/
Pretty much started this weekend. We're hoping it will make news more accessible to the outside world. In the future, it would be nice to have a good relationship with the blogosphere as well.
You guys had a fascinating discussion here. Most of us agree that the product has already improved--just one season too late. Manny Coto, the new Exec, has done a wonderful job, brought on some the best writers (Judith and Garfield R-S) who get what this era of trek is supposed to be about. The attention generated by this campaign can bring enough fans back that the franchise shouldn't require yearly donations from commercial space-flight. We just needed a boost and an extra bargaining chip.
Watch the blog for future news. And thanks for the publicity!
Congrats, Sui. I'm glad the discussion here helped you get going with the blog. I hope it's successful for you and the group.
Jake -- You say there's "a very real PERCEPTION of Trekkies as nutcases." The same could be said of many political candidates, Apple customers, the Save Surge evangelists, Scientologists, fans of Duran Duran circa 1986, etc.
The point is, perception is relative to your experience with the people in the community, the products, etc.
We define citizen marketers as anyone who generates media on behalf of products, services, companies or people. The media that citizen marketers can generate are multitudinous, whether it's a video, a fan site, a press release, a tribute song -- anything that's done in a non-paid, non-professional, volunteer format.
Ben,
Have you read the chat script we had with the $3million donor's ? Although they are a commercial industry, they are also Trek fans. They have stated that they were inspired many times by Star Trek. So would that not qualify their donation as a fan donation also ?
To Johnmoore:
Many kids are inspired by Star Trek. There are scientists, astronauts, pilots, and many others that have been inspired by Star Trek to do what they do today. As for donating the money to the needy, there probably isn't one of us that hasn't given to a charity allready. If you look at it like that, you shouldn't spend any money on anything that is considered a luxury for yourself. No movies, no dvd's, no computers, no eating out, etc... All of those things are luxury items for yourself and you could cut those out. The people who are donating consider Enterprise one of their luxury items. There is nothing wrong with spending money on yourself. As for the 3 million donation, I am sure those contributors have also made large donations to charities before.
Call us crazy. Call us Trekkies. Call us whatever you want. We consider ourselves ordinary citizens who are tired of reality shows taking the place of all the shows we like and want to take a stand to try to save at least one of them. Don't you ever get tired of never having a choice ?
Your discussions here have been great to read and given us some good ideas ! Thanks !!
Treklady
Treklady -- Compared to some of the commentators above, I do not take a skeptical, nay, cynical view of the $3 million donation. Unless proven otherwise, I see it as a sizeable donation toward the cause.
I couldn't find the chat with the donors. The TrekUnited site really needs 2 things: an RSS feed and a search function.
you may view the chatlog here: http://www.trekunited.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=2095
So far the RSS feed idea for the main site has been ignored. But the blog has a feed.
The forum search is located here: http://www.trekunited.com/forum/index.php?act=Search&f=6
I actually think this does more to harm the Star Trek franchise/community than it does to help
---------
http://members.fortunecity.com/telechargernero
