"Be interactive" is certainly popular advice for brands right now. Engage with your audience. Get them involved to build a relationship.

All great strategy advice. WHEN it makes sense. But many times, how it's implemented makes NO SENSE at all.

A great example from this past weekend was ABC's Good Morning America trying to find the best breakfast in the US. And by "best," they mean "highest calorie." After narrowing it to four choices, the TV audience was offered brief vignettes showing how each breakfast is prepared followed by a segment where we watched the show's cast eat the four breakfasts.

Then, because interactivity is great and we all want to be engaged and have a relationship with Good Morning America, we were encouraged to hurry to the GMA website to vote for our choice for the best breakfast!!!


The breakfast that looks the best? The breakfast that the hosts drooled over the most? The one with the most interesting recipe?

Last I checked, food mostly is about taste. So while this might have been an engaging interactive experience for fans of the 4 restaurants who might have actually EATEN one of the delicacies, it's stupid for everyone else. That's especially true since clicking the vote link on GMA's website took you to a list of the breakfasts, with none of the "additional information" promised on the show.

I repeat: Interactivity, engagement, and building relationships are incredible strategies, when they make sense. When they don't? They're just stupid strategies and a waste of time, with or without social media. Agreed? - Mike Brown

creative thinking questions extreme creativity amazing ideas

New call-to-action